TY - RPRT T1 - DESERTXPRESS HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER TRAIN: VICTORVILLE, CALIFORNIA TO LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. [Part 26 of 30] T2 - DESERTXPRESS HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER TRAIN: VICTORVILLE, CALIFORNIA TO LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. AN - 868224579; 14853-7_0026 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a fully grade-separated, dedicated double-track passenger railroad, to be known as the DesertXpress, along a 200-mile corridor from Victorville, California to Las Vegas, Nevada are proposed. High and increasing travel demand along Interstate 15 (I-15), which parallels the proposed railroad alignment, and constraints on the expansion of air travel indicate the need for an alternative mode of passenger transportation along this route. I-15 has also been the site of frequent accidents. Key areas of concern identified during scoping include: the use of sensitive lands, such as the Mojave National Preserve; potential effects to pre-historic archeological resources; adverse economic effects to the City of Barstow; noise impacts within populated areas; emissions; and the extent of traffic-reducing benefits within the Las Vegas area. This final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and two categories of rail alignment segments. Alternative A consists primarily of rail alignment segments that would be within the median of the I-15 freeway, while Alternative B consists primarily of rail alignment segments that would be within the fenced area of the I-15 freeway, adjacent to automobile travel lanes. Alternative A and B alignments would originate at one of three Victorville station alternatives and terminate at one of four Las Vegas station alternatives. The Option C alignment would diverge from the I-15 corridor near the community of Sloan in unincorporated Clark County and generally follow, or be located within, the existing Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way. Option C would terminate at one of three Las Vegas Station options, Central A, Central B or Downtown. The preferred alternative rail alignment would be almost entirely located within the existing I-15 corridor, with tracks running alongside freeway travel lanes and would utilize electric multiple unit (EMU) locomotive technology with a maximum speed of 150 miles per hour. Operations and maintenance facilities in Victorville and Las Vegas, and a maintenance of way facility in Baker, California would be included. Both the Las Vegas Southern Station as well as the Central Station B sites have been included in the preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The rail line would provide proven high-speed rail technology and a convenient alternative to the congested I-15 freeway and the declining air connections between the termini. Rail operations would provide 361 to 463 permanent jobs. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would displace desert tortoise and Mojave ground squirrel habitat, present a barrier to wildlife movement, and result in mortality of Mojave fringe-toed lizards, nesting raptors, migratory birds, banded gila monsters, burrowing owls, roosting bats, desert bighorn sheep, and American badgers. Two historic sites and numerous archaeological sites would be impacted. Approximately 3.4 acres of agricultural land would be directly impacted, and 6.8 acres indirectly impacted. Required rights-of-way could encroach on up to 50 acres of 100-year floodplain and 10,000 linear feet of stream channel. Minority groups would experience disproportionate impacts in the vicinity of the Victorville Station and operations and maintenance facility sites. Traffic congestion would increase in the vicinity of the Victorville Station. The rail corridor would lie within an area affected by high seismic activity. From 50 to 80 sensitive receptor sites along the line would experience noise and vibration levels in excess of federal standards. Construction workers would encounter 13 to 15 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the draft and supplemental draft EISs, see 09-0193D, Volume 33, Number 2 and 10-0497D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110097, Volume I--863 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--5,124 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 26 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Economic Assessments KW - Employment KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Nevada KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Districts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224579?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.title=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 86 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224578; 14851-5_0086 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 86 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224578?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 85 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224572; 14851-5_0085 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 85 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224572?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 84 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224565; 14851-5_0084 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 84 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224565?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 83 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224557; 14851-5_0083 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 83 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224557?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 82 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224549; 14851-5_0082 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 82 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224549?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DESERTXPRESS HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER TRAIN: VICTORVILLE, CALIFORNIA TO LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. [Part 28 of 30] T2 - DESERTXPRESS HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER TRAIN: VICTORVILLE, CALIFORNIA TO LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. AN - 868224547; 14853-7_0028 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a fully grade-separated, dedicated double-track passenger railroad, to be known as the DesertXpress, along a 200-mile corridor from Victorville, California to Las Vegas, Nevada are proposed. High and increasing travel demand along Interstate 15 (I-15), which parallels the proposed railroad alignment, and constraints on the expansion of air travel indicate the need for an alternative mode of passenger transportation along this route. I-15 has also been the site of frequent accidents. Key areas of concern identified during scoping include: the use of sensitive lands, such as the Mojave National Preserve; potential effects to pre-historic archeological resources; adverse economic effects to the City of Barstow; noise impacts within populated areas; emissions; and the extent of traffic-reducing benefits within the Las Vegas area. This final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and two categories of rail alignment segments. Alternative A consists primarily of rail alignment segments that would be within the median of the I-15 freeway, while Alternative B consists primarily of rail alignment segments that would be within the fenced area of the I-15 freeway, adjacent to automobile travel lanes. Alternative A and B alignments would originate at one of three Victorville station alternatives and terminate at one of four Las Vegas station alternatives. The Option C alignment would diverge from the I-15 corridor near the community of Sloan in unincorporated Clark County and generally follow, or be located within, the existing Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way. Option C would terminate at one of three Las Vegas Station options, Central A, Central B or Downtown. The preferred alternative rail alignment would be almost entirely located within the existing I-15 corridor, with tracks running alongside freeway travel lanes and would utilize electric multiple unit (EMU) locomotive technology with a maximum speed of 150 miles per hour. Operations and maintenance facilities in Victorville and Las Vegas, and a maintenance of way facility in Baker, California would be included. Both the Las Vegas Southern Station as well as the Central Station B sites have been included in the preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The rail line would provide proven high-speed rail technology and a convenient alternative to the congested I-15 freeway and the declining air connections between the termini. Rail operations would provide 361 to 463 permanent jobs. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would displace desert tortoise and Mojave ground squirrel habitat, present a barrier to wildlife movement, and result in mortality of Mojave fringe-toed lizards, nesting raptors, migratory birds, banded gila monsters, burrowing owls, roosting bats, desert bighorn sheep, and American badgers. Two historic sites and numerous archaeological sites would be impacted. Approximately 3.4 acres of agricultural land would be directly impacted, and 6.8 acres indirectly impacted. Required rights-of-way could encroach on up to 50 acres of 100-year floodplain and 10,000 linear feet of stream channel. Minority groups would experience disproportionate impacts in the vicinity of the Victorville Station and operations and maintenance facility sites. Traffic congestion would increase in the vicinity of the Victorville Station. The rail corridor would lie within an area affected by high seismic activity. From 50 to 80 sensitive receptor sites along the line would experience noise and vibration levels in excess of federal standards. Construction workers would encounter 13 to 15 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the draft and supplemental draft EISs, see 09-0193D, Volume 33, Number 2 and 10-0497D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110097, Volume I--863 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--5,124 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 28 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Economic Assessments KW - Employment KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Nevada KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Districts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224547?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.title=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 81 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224542; 14851-5_0081 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 81 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224542?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 80 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224533; 14851-5_0080 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 80 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224533?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DESERTXPRESS HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER TRAIN: VICTORVILLE, CALIFORNIA TO LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. [Part 14 of 30] T2 - DESERTXPRESS HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER TRAIN: VICTORVILLE, CALIFORNIA TO LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. AN - 868224532; 14853-7_0014 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a fully grade-separated, dedicated double-track passenger railroad, to be known as the DesertXpress, along a 200-mile corridor from Victorville, California to Las Vegas, Nevada are proposed. High and increasing travel demand along Interstate 15 (I-15), which parallels the proposed railroad alignment, and constraints on the expansion of air travel indicate the need for an alternative mode of passenger transportation along this route. I-15 has also been the site of frequent accidents. Key areas of concern identified during scoping include: the use of sensitive lands, such as the Mojave National Preserve; potential effects to pre-historic archeological resources; adverse economic effects to the City of Barstow; noise impacts within populated areas; emissions; and the extent of traffic-reducing benefits within the Las Vegas area. This final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and two categories of rail alignment segments. Alternative A consists primarily of rail alignment segments that would be within the median of the I-15 freeway, while Alternative B consists primarily of rail alignment segments that would be within the fenced area of the I-15 freeway, adjacent to automobile travel lanes. Alternative A and B alignments would originate at one of three Victorville station alternatives and terminate at one of four Las Vegas station alternatives. The Option C alignment would diverge from the I-15 corridor near the community of Sloan in unincorporated Clark County and generally follow, or be located within, the existing Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way. Option C would terminate at one of three Las Vegas Station options, Central A, Central B or Downtown. The preferred alternative rail alignment would be almost entirely located within the existing I-15 corridor, with tracks running alongside freeway travel lanes and would utilize electric multiple unit (EMU) locomotive technology with a maximum speed of 150 miles per hour. Operations and maintenance facilities in Victorville and Las Vegas, and a maintenance of way facility in Baker, California would be included. Both the Las Vegas Southern Station as well as the Central Station B sites have been included in the preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The rail line would provide proven high-speed rail technology and a convenient alternative to the congested I-15 freeway and the declining air connections between the termini. Rail operations would provide 361 to 463 permanent jobs. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would displace desert tortoise and Mojave ground squirrel habitat, present a barrier to wildlife movement, and result in mortality of Mojave fringe-toed lizards, nesting raptors, migratory birds, banded gila monsters, burrowing owls, roosting bats, desert bighorn sheep, and American badgers. Two historic sites and numerous archaeological sites would be impacted. Approximately 3.4 acres of agricultural land would be directly impacted, and 6.8 acres indirectly impacted. Required rights-of-way could encroach on up to 50 acres of 100-year floodplain and 10,000 linear feet of stream channel. Minority groups would experience disproportionate impacts in the vicinity of the Victorville Station and operations and maintenance facility sites. Traffic congestion would increase in the vicinity of the Victorville Station. The rail corridor would lie within an area affected by high seismic activity. From 50 to 80 sensitive receptor sites along the line would experience noise and vibration levels in excess of federal standards. Construction workers would encounter 13 to 15 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the draft and supplemental draft EISs, see 09-0193D, Volume 33, Number 2 and 10-0497D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110097, Volume I--863 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--5,124 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Economic Assessments KW - Employment KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Nevada KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Districts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224532?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.title=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 79 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224526; 14851-5_0079 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 79 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224526?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DESERTXPRESS HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER TRAIN: VICTORVILLE, CALIFORNIA TO LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. [Part 12 of 30] T2 - DESERTXPRESS HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER TRAIN: VICTORVILLE, CALIFORNIA TO LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. AN - 868224523; 14853-7_0012 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a fully grade-separated, dedicated double-track passenger railroad, to be known as the DesertXpress, along a 200-mile corridor from Victorville, California to Las Vegas, Nevada are proposed. High and increasing travel demand along Interstate 15 (I-15), which parallels the proposed railroad alignment, and constraints on the expansion of air travel indicate the need for an alternative mode of passenger transportation along this route. I-15 has also been the site of frequent accidents. Key areas of concern identified during scoping include: the use of sensitive lands, such as the Mojave National Preserve; potential effects to pre-historic archeological resources; adverse economic effects to the City of Barstow; noise impacts within populated areas; emissions; and the extent of traffic-reducing benefits within the Las Vegas area. This final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and two categories of rail alignment segments. Alternative A consists primarily of rail alignment segments that would be within the median of the I-15 freeway, while Alternative B consists primarily of rail alignment segments that would be within the fenced area of the I-15 freeway, adjacent to automobile travel lanes. Alternative A and B alignments would originate at one of three Victorville station alternatives and terminate at one of four Las Vegas station alternatives. The Option C alignment would diverge from the I-15 corridor near the community of Sloan in unincorporated Clark County and generally follow, or be located within, the existing Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way. Option C would terminate at one of three Las Vegas Station options, Central A, Central B or Downtown. The preferred alternative rail alignment would be almost entirely located within the existing I-15 corridor, with tracks running alongside freeway travel lanes and would utilize electric multiple unit (EMU) locomotive technology with a maximum speed of 150 miles per hour. Operations and maintenance facilities in Victorville and Las Vegas, and a maintenance of way facility in Baker, California would be included. Both the Las Vegas Southern Station as well as the Central Station B sites have been included in the preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The rail line would provide proven high-speed rail technology and a convenient alternative to the congested I-15 freeway and the declining air connections between the termini. Rail operations would provide 361 to 463 permanent jobs. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would displace desert tortoise and Mojave ground squirrel habitat, present a barrier to wildlife movement, and result in mortality of Mojave fringe-toed lizards, nesting raptors, migratory birds, banded gila monsters, burrowing owls, roosting bats, desert bighorn sheep, and American badgers. Two historic sites and numerous archaeological sites would be impacted. Approximately 3.4 acres of agricultural land would be directly impacted, and 6.8 acres indirectly impacted. Required rights-of-way could encroach on up to 50 acres of 100-year floodplain and 10,000 linear feet of stream channel. Minority groups would experience disproportionate impacts in the vicinity of the Victorville Station and operations and maintenance facility sites. Traffic congestion would increase in the vicinity of the Victorville Station. The rail corridor would lie within an area affected by high seismic activity. From 50 to 80 sensitive receptor sites along the line would experience noise and vibration levels in excess of federal standards. Construction workers would encounter 13 to 15 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the draft and supplemental draft EISs, see 09-0193D, Volume 33, Number 2 and 10-0497D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110097, Volume I--863 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--5,124 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Economic Assessments KW - Employment KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Nevada KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Districts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224523?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.title=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 78 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224520; 14851-5_0078 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 78 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224520?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 77 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224516; 14851-5_0077 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 77 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224516?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 75 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224505; 14851-5_0075 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 75 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224505?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 72 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224498; 14851-5_0072 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 72 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224498?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DESERTXPRESS HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER TRAIN: VICTORVILLE, CALIFORNIA TO LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. [Part 5 of 30] T2 - DESERTXPRESS HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER TRAIN: VICTORVILLE, CALIFORNIA TO LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. AN - 868224495; 14853-7_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a fully grade-separated, dedicated double-track passenger railroad, to be known as the DesertXpress, along a 200-mile corridor from Victorville, California to Las Vegas, Nevada are proposed. High and increasing travel demand along Interstate 15 (I-15), which parallels the proposed railroad alignment, and constraints on the expansion of air travel indicate the need for an alternative mode of passenger transportation along this route. I-15 has also been the site of frequent accidents. Key areas of concern identified during scoping include: the use of sensitive lands, such as the Mojave National Preserve; potential effects to pre-historic archeological resources; adverse economic effects to the City of Barstow; noise impacts within populated areas; emissions; and the extent of traffic-reducing benefits within the Las Vegas area. This final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and two categories of rail alignment segments. Alternative A consists primarily of rail alignment segments that would be within the median of the I-15 freeway, while Alternative B consists primarily of rail alignment segments that would be within the fenced area of the I-15 freeway, adjacent to automobile travel lanes. Alternative A and B alignments would originate at one of three Victorville station alternatives and terminate at one of four Las Vegas station alternatives. The Option C alignment would diverge from the I-15 corridor near the community of Sloan in unincorporated Clark County and generally follow, or be located within, the existing Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way. Option C would terminate at one of three Las Vegas Station options, Central A, Central B or Downtown. The preferred alternative rail alignment would be almost entirely located within the existing I-15 corridor, with tracks running alongside freeway travel lanes and would utilize electric multiple unit (EMU) locomotive technology with a maximum speed of 150 miles per hour. Operations and maintenance facilities in Victorville and Las Vegas, and a maintenance of way facility in Baker, California would be included. Both the Las Vegas Southern Station as well as the Central Station B sites have been included in the preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The rail line would provide proven high-speed rail technology and a convenient alternative to the congested I-15 freeway and the declining air connections between the termini. Rail operations would provide 361 to 463 permanent jobs. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would displace desert tortoise and Mojave ground squirrel habitat, present a barrier to wildlife movement, and result in mortality of Mojave fringe-toed lizards, nesting raptors, migratory birds, banded gila monsters, burrowing owls, roosting bats, desert bighorn sheep, and American badgers. Two historic sites and numerous archaeological sites would be impacted. Approximately 3.4 acres of agricultural land would be directly impacted, and 6.8 acres indirectly impacted. Required rights-of-way could encroach on up to 50 acres of 100-year floodplain and 10,000 linear feet of stream channel. Minority groups would experience disproportionate impacts in the vicinity of the Victorville Station and operations and maintenance facility sites. Traffic congestion would increase in the vicinity of the Victorville Station. The rail corridor would lie within an area affected by high seismic activity. From 50 to 80 sensitive receptor sites along the line would experience noise and vibration levels in excess of federal standards. Construction workers would encounter 13 to 15 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the draft and supplemental draft EISs, see 09-0193D, Volume 33, Number 2 and 10-0497D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110097, Volume I--863 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--5,124 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Economic Assessments KW - Employment KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Nevada KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Districts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224495?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.title=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DESERTXPRESS HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER TRAIN: VICTORVILLE, CALIFORNIA TO LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. [Part 4 of 30] T2 - DESERTXPRESS HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER TRAIN: VICTORVILLE, CALIFORNIA TO LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. AN - 868224486; 14853-7_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a fully grade-separated, dedicated double-track passenger railroad, to be known as the DesertXpress, along a 200-mile corridor from Victorville, California to Las Vegas, Nevada are proposed. High and increasing travel demand along Interstate 15 (I-15), which parallels the proposed railroad alignment, and constraints on the expansion of air travel indicate the need for an alternative mode of passenger transportation along this route. I-15 has also been the site of frequent accidents. Key areas of concern identified during scoping include: the use of sensitive lands, such as the Mojave National Preserve; potential effects to pre-historic archeological resources; adverse economic effects to the City of Barstow; noise impacts within populated areas; emissions; and the extent of traffic-reducing benefits within the Las Vegas area. This final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and two categories of rail alignment segments. Alternative A consists primarily of rail alignment segments that would be within the median of the I-15 freeway, while Alternative B consists primarily of rail alignment segments that would be within the fenced area of the I-15 freeway, adjacent to automobile travel lanes. Alternative A and B alignments would originate at one of three Victorville station alternatives and terminate at one of four Las Vegas station alternatives. The Option C alignment would diverge from the I-15 corridor near the community of Sloan in unincorporated Clark County and generally follow, or be located within, the existing Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way. Option C would terminate at one of three Las Vegas Station options, Central A, Central B or Downtown. The preferred alternative rail alignment would be almost entirely located within the existing I-15 corridor, with tracks running alongside freeway travel lanes and would utilize electric multiple unit (EMU) locomotive technology with a maximum speed of 150 miles per hour. Operations and maintenance facilities in Victorville and Las Vegas, and a maintenance of way facility in Baker, California would be included. Both the Las Vegas Southern Station as well as the Central Station B sites have been included in the preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The rail line would provide proven high-speed rail technology and a convenient alternative to the congested I-15 freeway and the declining air connections between the termini. Rail operations would provide 361 to 463 permanent jobs. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would displace desert tortoise and Mojave ground squirrel habitat, present a barrier to wildlife movement, and result in mortality of Mojave fringe-toed lizards, nesting raptors, migratory birds, banded gila monsters, burrowing owls, roosting bats, desert bighorn sheep, and American badgers. Two historic sites and numerous archaeological sites would be impacted. Approximately 3.4 acres of agricultural land would be directly impacted, and 6.8 acres indirectly impacted. Required rights-of-way could encroach on up to 50 acres of 100-year floodplain and 10,000 linear feet of stream channel. Minority groups would experience disproportionate impacts in the vicinity of the Victorville Station and operations and maintenance facility sites. Traffic congestion would increase in the vicinity of the Victorville Station. The rail corridor would lie within an area affected by high seismic activity. From 50 to 80 sensitive receptor sites along the line would experience noise and vibration levels in excess of federal standards. Construction workers would encounter 13 to 15 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the draft and supplemental draft EISs, see 09-0193D, Volume 33, Number 2 and 10-0497D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110097, Volume I--863 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--5,124 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Economic Assessments KW - Employment KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Nevada KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Districts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224486?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.title=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 70 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224485; 14851-5_0070 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 70 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224485?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DESERTXPRESS HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER TRAIN: VICTORVILLE, CALIFORNIA TO LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. [Part 3 of 30] T2 - DESERTXPRESS HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER TRAIN: VICTORVILLE, CALIFORNIA TO LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. AN - 868224481; 14853-7_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a fully grade-separated, dedicated double-track passenger railroad, to be known as the DesertXpress, along a 200-mile corridor from Victorville, California to Las Vegas, Nevada are proposed. High and increasing travel demand along Interstate 15 (I-15), which parallels the proposed railroad alignment, and constraints on the expansion of air travel indicate the need for an alternative mode of passenger transportation along this route. I-15 has also been the site of frequent accidents. Key areas of concern identified during scoping include: the use of sensitive lands, such as the Mojave National Preserve; potential effects to pre-historic archeological resources; adverse economic effects to the City of Barstow; noise impacts within populated areas; emissions; and the extent of traffic-reducing benefits within the Las Vegas area. This final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and two categories of rail alignment segments. Alternative A consists primarily of rail alignment segments that would be within the median of the I-15 freeway, while Alternative B consists primarily of rail alignment segments that would be within the fenced area of the I-15 freeway, adjacent to automobile travel lanes. Alternative A and B alignments would originate at one of three Victorville station alternatives and terminate at one of four Las Vegas station alternatives. The Option C alignment would diverge from the I-15 corridor near the community of Sloan in unincorporated Clark County and generally follow, or be located within, the existing Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way. Option C would terminate at one of three Las Vegas Station options, Central A, Central B or Downtown. The preferred alternative rail alignment would be almost entirely located within the existing I-15 corridor, with tracks running alongside freeway travel lanes and would utilize electric multiple unit (EMU) locomotive technology with a maximum speed of 150 miles per hour. Operations and maintenance facilities in Victorville and Las Vegas, and a maintenance of way facility in Baker, California would be included. Both the Las Vegas Southern Station as well as the Central Station B sites have been included in the preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The rail line would provide proven high-speed rail technology and a convenient alternative to the congested I-15 freeway and the declining air connections between the termini. Rail operations would provide 361 to 463 permanent jobs. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would displace desert tortoise and Mojave ground squirrel habitat, present a barrier to wildlife movement, and result in mortality of Mojave fringe-toed lizards, nesting raptors, migratory birds, banded gila monsters, burrowing owls, roosting bats, desert bighorn sheep, and American badgers. Two historic sites and numerous archaeological sites would be impacted. Approximately 3.4 acres of agricultural land would be directly impacted, and 6.8 acres indirectly impacted. Required rights-of-way could encroach on up to 50 acres of 100-year floodplain and 10,000 linear feet of stream channel. Minority groups would experience disproportionate impacts in the vicinity of the Victorville Station and operations and maintenance facility sites. Traffic congestion would increase in the vicinity of the Victorville Station. The rail corridor would lie within an area affected by high seismic activity. From 50 to 80 sensitive receptor sites along the line would experience noise and vibration levels in excess of federal standards. Construction workers would encounter 13 to 15 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the draft and supplemental draft EISs, see 09-0193D, Volume 33, Number 2 and 10-0497D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110097, Volume I--863 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--5,124 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Economic Assessments KW - Employment KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Nevada KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Districts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224481?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.title=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 69 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224478; 14851-5_0069 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 69 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224478?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 66 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224476; 14851-5_0066 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 66 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224476?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 2 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224475; 14851-5_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224475?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DESERTXPRESS HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER TRAIN: VICTORVILLE, CALIFORNIA TO LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. [Part 24 of 30] T2 - DESERTXPRESS HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER TRAIN: VICTORVILLE, CALIFORNIA TO LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. AN - 868224474; 14853-7_0024 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a fully grade-separated, dedicated double-track passenger railroad, to be known as the DesertXpress, along a 200-mile corridor from Victorville, California to Las Vegas, Nevada are proposed. High and increasing travel demand along Interstate 15 (I-15), which parallels the proposed railroad alignment, and constraints on the expansion of air travel indicate the need for an alternative mode of passenger transportation along this route. I-15 has also been the site of frequent accidents. Key areas of concern identified during scoping include: the use of sensitive lands, such as the Mojave National Preserve; potential effects to pre-historic archeological resources; adverse economic effects to the City of Barstow; noise impacts within populated areas; emissions; and the extent of traffic-reducing benefits within the Las Vegas area. This final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and two categories of rail alignment segments. Alternative A consists primarily of rail alignment segments that would be within the median of the I-15 freeway, while Alternative B consists primarily of rail alignment segments that would be within the fenced area of the I-15 freeway, adjacent to automobile travel lanes. Alternative A and B alignments would originate at one of three Victorville station alternatives and terminate at one of four Las Vegas station alternatives. The Option C alignment would diverge from the I-15 corridor near the community of Sloan in unincorporated Clark County and generally follow, or be located within, the existing Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way. Option C would terminate at one of three Las Vegas Station options, Central A, Central B or Downtown. The preferred alternative rail alignment would be almost entirely located within the existing I-15 corridor, with tracks running alongside freeway travel lanes and would utilize electric multiple unit (EMU) locomotive technology with a maximum speed of 150 miles per hour. Operations and maintenance facilities in Victorville and Las Vegas, and a maintenance of way facility in Baker, California would be included. Both the Las Vegas Southern Station as well as the Central Station B sites have been included in the preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The rail line would provide proven high-speed rail technology and a convenient alternative to the congested I-15 freeway and the declining air connections between the termini. Rail operations would provide 361 to 463 permanent jobs. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would displace desert tortoise and Mojave ground squirrel habitat, present a barrier to wildlife movement, and result in mortality of Mojave fringe-toed lizards, nesting raptors, migratory birds, banded gila monsters, burrowing owls, roosting bats, desert bighorn sheep, and American badgers. Two historic sites and numerous archaeological sites would be impacted. Approximately 3.4 acres of agricultural land would be directly impacted, and 6.8 acres indirectly impacted. Required rights-of-way could encroach on up to 50 acres of 100-year floodplain and 10,000 linear feet of stream channel. Minority groups would experience disproportionate impacts in the vicinity of the Victorville Station and operations and maintenance facility sites. Traffic congestion would increase in the vicinity of the Victorville Station. The rail corridor would lie within an area affected by high seismic activity. From 50 to 80 sensitive receptor sites along the line would experience noise and vibration levels in excess of federal standards. Construction workers would encounter 13 to 15 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the draft and supplemental draft EISs, see 09-0193D, Volume 33, Number 2 and 10-0497D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110097, Volume I--863 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--5,124 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 24 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Economic Assessments KW - Employment KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Nevada KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Districts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224474?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 61 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868224394; 14852-6_0061 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 61 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224394?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 60 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868224390; 14852-6_0060 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 60 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224390?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 59 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868224387; 14852-6_0059 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 59 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224387?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 58 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868224383; 14852-6_0058 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 58 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224383?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 57 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868224379; 14852-6_0057 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 57 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224379?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 56 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868224375; 14852-6_0056 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 56 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224375?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 55 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868224371; 14852-6_0055 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 55 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224371?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 57 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224359; 14851-5_0057 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 57 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224359?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 56 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224355; 14851-5_0056 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 56 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224355?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.title=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 54 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224354; 14851-5_0054 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 54 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224354?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DESERTXPRESS HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER TRAIN: VICTORVILLE, CALIFORNIA TO LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. [Part 2 of 30] T2 - DESERTXPRESS HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER TRAIN: VICTORVILLE, CALIFORNIA TO LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. AN - 868224352; 14853-7_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a fully grade-separated, dedicated double-track passenger railroad, to be known as the DesertXpress, along a 200-mile corridor from Victorville, California to Las Vegas, Nevada are proposed. High and increasing travel demand along Interstate 15 (I-15), which parallels the proposed railroad alignment, and constraints on the expansion of air travel indicate the need for an alternative mode of passenger transportation along this route. I-15 has also been the site of frequent accidents. Key areas of concern identified during scoping include: the use of sensitive lands, such as the Mojave National Preserve; potential effects to pre-historic archeological resources; adverse economic effects to the City of Barstow; noise impacts within populated areas; emissions; and the extent of traffic-reducing benefits within the Las Vegas area. This final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and two categories of rail alignment segments. Alternative A consists primarily of rail alignment segments that would be within the median of the I-15 freeway, while Alternative B consists primarily of rail alignment segments that would be within the fenced area of the I-15 freeway, adjacent to automobile travel lanes. Alternative A and B alignments would originate at one of three Victorville station alternatives and terminate at one of four Las Vegas station alternatives. The Option C alignment would diverge from the I-15 corridor near the community of Sloan in unincorporated Clark County and generally follow, or be located within, the existing Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way. Option C would terminate at one of three Las Vegas Station options, Central A, Central B or Downtown. The preferred alternative rail alignment would be almost entirely located within the existing I-15 corridor, with tracks running alongside freeway travel lanes and would utilize electric multiple unit (EMU) locomotive technology with a maximum speed of 150 miles per hour. Operations and maintenance facilities in Victorville and Las Vegas, and a maintenance of way facility in Baker, California would be included. Both the Las Vegas Southern Station as well as the Central Station B sites have been included in the preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The rail line would provide proven high-speed rail technology and a convenient alternative to the congested I-15 freeway and the declining air connections between the termini. Rail operations would provide 361 to 463 permanent jobs. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would displace desert tortoise and Mojave ground squirrel habitat, present a barrier to wildlife movement, and result in mortality of Mojave fringe-toed lizards, nesting raptors, migratory birds, banded gila monsters, burrowing owls, roosting bats, desert bighorn sheep, and American badgers. Two historic sites and numerous archaeological sites would be impacted. Approximately 3.4 acres of agricultural land would be directly impacted, and 6.8 acres indirectly impacted. Required rights-of-way could encroach on up to 50 acres of 100-year floodplain and 10,000 linear feet of stream channel. Minority groups would experience disproportionate impacts in the vicinity of the Victorville Station and operations and maintenance facility sites. Traffic congestion would increase in the vicinity of the Victorville Station. The rail corridor would lie within an area affected by high seismic activity. From 50 to 80 sensitive receptor sites along the line would experience noise and vibration levels in excess of federal standards. Construction workers would encounter 13 to 15 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the draft and supplemental draft EISs, see 09-0193D, Volume 33, Number 2 and 10-0497D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110097, Volume I--863 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--5,124 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Economic Assessments KW - Employment KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Nevada KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Districts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224352?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.title=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 55 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224351; 14851-5_0055 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 55 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224351?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 53 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224350; 14851-5_0053 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 53 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224350?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.title=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 49 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224343; 14851-5_0049 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 49 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224343?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.title=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 52 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224339; 14851-5_0052 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 52 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224339?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 48 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224330; 14851-5_0048 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 48 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224330?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 51 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224327; 14851-5_0051 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 51 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224327?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 47 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224321; 14851-5_0047 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 47 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224321?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.title=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 50 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224317; 14851-5_0050 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 50 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224317?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 54 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868224315; 14852-6_0054 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 54 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224315?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 46 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224311; 14851-5_0046 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 46 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224311?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 53 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868224309; 14852-6_0053 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 53 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224309?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 32 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224306; 14851-5_0032 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 32 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224306?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 52 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868224305; 14852-6_0052 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 52 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224305?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 45 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224303; 14851-5_0045 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 45 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224303?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 31 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224300; 14851-5_0031 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 31 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224300?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 51 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868224298; 14852-6_0051 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 51 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224298?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 44 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224295; 14851-5_0044 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 44 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224295?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 50 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868224292; 14852-6_0050 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 50 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224292?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 43 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224288; 14851-5_0043 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 43 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224288?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 49 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868224285; 14852-6_0049 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 49 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224285?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 48 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868224279; 14852-6_0048 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 48 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224279?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 42 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224278; 14851-5_0042 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 42 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224278?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 47 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868224273; 14852-6_0047 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 47 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224273?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 41 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224270; 14851-5_0041 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 41 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224270?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 46 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868224269; 14852-6_0046 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 46 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224269?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 45 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868224262; 14852-6_0045 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 45 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224262?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 40 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224261; 14851-5_0040 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 40 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224261?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 44 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868224254; 14852-6_0044 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 44 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224254?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 40 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868224251; 14852-6_0040 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 40 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224251?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 39 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224249; 14851-5_0039 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 39 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224249?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 39 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868224244; 14852-6_0039 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 39 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224244?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 38 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224238; 14851-5_0038 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 38 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224238?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 38 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868224236; 14852-6_0038 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 38 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224236?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 65 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224235; 14851-5_0065 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 65 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224235?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 36 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868224229; 14852-6_0036 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 36 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224229?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 64 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224222; 14851-5_0064 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 64 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224222?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 35 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868224216; 14852-6_0035 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 35 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224216?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 34 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868224210; 14852-6_0034 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 34 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224210?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 63 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224208; 14851-5_0063 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 63 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224208?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 33 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868224201; 14852-6_0033 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 33 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224201?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 62 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224196; 14851-5_0062 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 62 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224196?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 32 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868224188; 14852-6_0032 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 32 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224188?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 28 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868224177; 14852-6_0028 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 28 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224177?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 60 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224166; 14851-5_0060 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 60 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224166?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 18 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868224164; 14852-6_0018 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 18 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224164?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 17 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868224152; 14852-6_0017 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 17 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224152?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 16 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868224140; 14852-6_0016 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 16 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224140?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 15 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868224135; 14852-6_0015 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224135?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 59 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224132; 14851-5_0059 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 59 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224132?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 9 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868224119; 14852-6_0009 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224119?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 58 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224113; 14851-5_0058 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 58 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224113?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 8 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868224104; 14852-6_0008 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224104?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 37 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224098; 14851-5_0037 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 37 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224098?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 7 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868224093; 14852-6_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224093?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 36 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224088; 14851-5_0036 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 36 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224088?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 95 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224078; 14851-5_0095 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 95 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224078?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 35 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224077; 14851-5_0035 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 35 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224077?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 94 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224067; 14851-5_0094 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 94 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224067?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 93 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224056; 14851-5_0093 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 93 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224056?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 92 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224042; 14851-5_0092 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 92 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224042?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 91 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224029; 14851-5_0091 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 91 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224029?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 90 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224021; 14851-5_0090 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 90 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224021?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 27 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224012; 14851-5_0027 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 27 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224012?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 26 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868224004; 14851-5_0026 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 26 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224004?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 25 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868223996; 14851-5_0025 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 25 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223996?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 22 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868223989; 14851-5_0022 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 22 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223989?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 21 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868223981; 14851-5_0021 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 21 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223981?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 20 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868223976; 14851-5_0020 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 20 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223976?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 16 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868223968; 14851-5_0016 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 16 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223968?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 15 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868223962; 14851-5_0015 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223962?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 14 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868223955; 14851-5_0014 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223955?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 13 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868223945; 14851-5_0013 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 13 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223945?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 12 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868223934; 14851-5_0012 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223934?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 30 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868223929; 14851-5_0030 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 30 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223929?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 29 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868223923; 14851-5_0029 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 29 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223923?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 28 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868223917; 14851-5_0028 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 28 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223917?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 9 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868223913; 14851-5_0009 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223913?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 24 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868223910; 14851-5_0024 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 24 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223910?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 8 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868223905; 14851-5_0008 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223905?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 23 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868223901; 14851-5_0023 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 23 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223901?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 7 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868223890; 14851-5_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223890?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 6 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868223872; 14851-5_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223872?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 5 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868223859; 14851-5_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223859?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 17 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868223856; 14851-5_0017 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 17 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223856?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 4 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868223841; 14851-5_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223841?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 6 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868223803; 14852-6_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223803?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 89 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868223795; 14851-5_0089 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 89 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223795?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 5 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868223789; 14852-6_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223789?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 4 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868223778; 14852-6_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223778?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 68 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868223776; 14851-5_0068 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 68 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223776?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 88 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868223771; 14851-5_0088 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 88 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223771?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 3 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868223767; 14852-6_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223767?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 67 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868223752; 14851-5_0067 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 67 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223752?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 87 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868223746; 14851-5_0087 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 87 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223746?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 3 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868223724; 14851-5_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223724?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 31 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868223548; 14852-6_0031 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 31 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223548?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 30 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868223531; 14852-6_0030 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 30 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223531?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 29 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868223516; 14852-6_0029 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 29 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223516?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 27 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868223499; 14852-6_0027 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 27 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223499?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 26 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868223481; 14852-6_0026 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 26 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223481?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 25 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868223466; 14852-6_0025 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 25 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223466?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 74 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868223465; 14851-5_0074 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 74 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223465?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 20 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868223450; 14852-6_0020 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 20 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223450?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. [Part 73 of 96] T2 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 868223445; 14851-5_0073 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 73 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223445?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 43 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868223327; 14852-6_0043 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 43 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223327?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 42 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868223315; 14852-6_0042 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 42 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223315?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 41 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868223292; 14852-6_0041 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 41 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223292?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 37 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868223274; 14852-6_0037 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 37 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223274?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 1 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868223261; 14852-6_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223261?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 24 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868223103; 14852-6_0024 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 24 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223103?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 23 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868223062; 14852-6_0023 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 23 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223062?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 22 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868223029; 14852-6_0022 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 22 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223029?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 21 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868222998; 14852-6_0021 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 21 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868222998?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 19 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868222734; 14852-6_0019 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 19 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868222734?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 14 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868222705; 14852-6_0014 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868222705?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 13 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868222679; 14852-6_0013 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 13 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868222679?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 12 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868222655; 14852-6_0012 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868222655?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 11 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868222634; 14852-6_0011 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868222634?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 10 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868222609; 14852-6_0010 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868222609?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 2 of 61] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 868222580; 14852-6_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between the deep-water port and Interior Alaska. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. This final EIS considers 12 action alternatives based on two southern, three northern, and three connector segments. A No-Action Alternative is also considered. The environmentally preferred alternative is the Mac East Variant-Connector 3 Variant-Houston-Houston South Alternative. This alternative is located in an area of flat topography and would have a comparatively low level of potential impacts to most resources. The Mac East Variant Segment would begin in the terminal reserve area and would proceed north along the east side of the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project before its junction with the Connector 3 Variant segment. The 5.47-mile-long connector segment would shift to the west and would cross Ayrshire Avenue and Farmers Road before continuing north of My Lake and crossing an adjacent ravine. From the Connector 3 Variant segment, the Houston Segment would proceed northeast, traveling through slightly undulating terrain with areas of wetland. The segment would pass between Papoose Twins and Crooked lakes, crossing an area of hilly terrain. The remaining four miles of the Houston Segment would be in a gradually rising wetland area to a point near Muleshoe and Little Horseshoe lakes, where it would connect to the Houston South Segment. This segment would traverse northeast, passing just west of Pear Lake and would tie into the existing main line near mile post 174.0 without crossing Parks Highway. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would involve crossings of floodplains, 19 culverts, two culvert extensions, two drainage structures, and two bridges. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Other impacts would include: loss of 164 acres of wetlands; loss of 652 acres of wildlife habitat, including 223 acres of moose foraging habitat; long-term impact to forest communities; and potential impacts to 23 cultural resources. The Connector 3 segment would displace two structures. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0148D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110096, Final EIS--943 pages, Appendices--1,066 pages, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868222580?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH COAST RAIL PROJECT, BRISTOL, PLYMOUTH, NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES, MASSACHUSETTS. AN - 16370739; 14851 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a permit to fill wetlands, so as to construct a public transportation corridor over a distance of 50 to 60 miles between South Station in Boston and the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts is proposed. The current transportation system connecting Southeastern Massachusetts with Boston and internally is primarily a highway system and characterized by a lack of transportation mode choice, especially public transit. The highway system is composed of major, limited access state routes, regional highways, and local roadways. As the population in the South Coast region and employment in the Boston area have grown, the demands on the roadway system have increased, as reflected by increased traffic volumes, resulting in traffic congestion and adverse effects on air quality, climate change and transportation safety. Projected regional growth and the trend of commuters to locate to areas further away from the Boston metropolitan core will exacerbate the existing problems and affect an increasing number of people. This draft EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative which would provide enhancements to existing bus services with limited improvements to the existing transit and roadway system, and seven build alternatives. Under the Attleboro Alternative, new commuter rail service would be provided through Attleboro using the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary, a new bypass track and the Northeast Corridor. The Stoughton Alternative, would provide commuter rail service to South Station through Stoughton, by the New Bedford Main Line, Fall River Secondary, Attleboro Secondary to Weir Junction in Taunton and an extension of the existing Stoughton Branch to Taunton. The Whittenton variation would follow the same route but rather than continuing north in a straight line towards Taunton, would swing northwest around Taunton in a more serpentine route, following the right-of-way of the former Whittenton Branch of the Stoughton Line. This option would serve the Whittenton section of Taunton. Both electric and diesel commuter rail options were evaluated for the Attleboro, Stoughton, and Whittenton alternatives. All rail alternatives would include improvements to the existing rail infrastructure and two overnight layover facilities, one on the New Bedford Main Line and one on the Fall River Secondary. Reconstruction of undergrade bridges (railroad over road or river) and overhead bridges (highway over railroad) along the existing and new rights-of-way would be required. The rail alternatives would result in 8,040 to 9,640 daily transit trips at proposed South Coast Rail stations. The Rapid Bus Alternative would provide commuter bus service to South Station via Interstate 93 (I-93), State Route 140 and State Route 24. North of I-495, buses would use a combination of new zipper bus lanes, new reversible bus lanes, two-way bus lanes, existing zipper HOV lanes, and existing HOV lanes, along with a short section in mixed traffic. South of the I-495 interchange in Raynham, buses would travel in the general purpose lanes with mixed traffic. The New Bedford route would be 56.4 miles long and the Fall River route would be 51.5 miles long. This alternative requires improvements to highway infrastructure and would include six new rapid bus stations. Capital costs are estimated in 2009 dollars at $1.4 million to $2.0 million for the rail alternatives and at $811,579 for the bus alternative. The Stoughton Alternative is preferred by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new transportation corridor would help to more fully meet the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, and to enhance regional mobility, while supporting smart growth planning and development strategies in the affected communities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Discharge of fill material into waters of the United States would range in area from less than 11 acres to approximately 21 acres, depending on the alternative selected. Property acquisitions associated with the Attleboro Alternatives would require six residential displacements and six business displacements. The Stoughton Alternatives would require four residential displacements and four business displacements. The Whittenton Alternatives would require three residential displacements and four business displacements. The Rapid Bus Alternative would not require any residential displacements, but would require four business displacements. Construction would create neighborhood fragmentation, impact six to eight cultural resources, and have visual impacts. Noise from operation of rail cars would have severe impacts at 347 to 469 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110095, Volume I--1,276 pages, Volume II--Figures, Volume III-Appendices, April 1, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Massachusetts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/16370739?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.title=SOUTH+COAST+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+BRISTOL%2C+PLYMOUTH%2C+NORFOLK+AND+SUFFOLK+COUNTIES%2C+MASSACHUSETTS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Concord, Massachusetts; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 1, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 180 WESTSIDE EXPRESSWAY ROUTE ADOPTION STUDY, FRESNO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 1 of 1] T2 - STATE ROUTE 180 WESTSIDE EXPRESSWAY ROUTE ADOPTION STUDY, FRESNO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873126684; 14841-5_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The adoption of a route for a four-lane expressway for State Route 180 (SR 180) from Interstate 5 (I-5) to the western terminus of SR 180, in western Fresno County, California is proposed. The study area is located west of the city of Fresno, from Whitesbridge Avenue on the south, nearly to the San Joaquin River on the north, and from I-5 on the west to the end of the freeway portion of SR 180 near Valentine Avenue on the east. Agricultural landscapes typical of Central Valley predominate and include flat cropland, vineyards, orchards, and some feedlots and dairies. There is no reliable and continuous regional east-west highway between Fresno and I-5 under current conditions. By 2030, the easternmost section of existing SR 180 (Whitesbridge Avenue) between Kerman and Fresno would have inadequate capacity to accommodate travel demand. SR 180 is primarily a two-lane conventional highway within the study area. This tier I draft EIS considers three proposed route adoption alternatives together with additional route variations and a No Action Alternative. Alternative 1 extends 48 miles across the valley, beginning at a point where a westerly extension of Belmont Avenue would intersect I-5. The alignment proceeds east crossing the California Aqueduct and turns southeast between San Diego Avenue and Ohio Avenue, passing south of the City of Mendota. This alternative generally follows existing SR 180 until it reaches a connection with the existing SR 180 freeway terminus at Brawley Avenue. Variation 1A (Shields Avenue/West Mendota Bypass) would provide additional opportunities for access for the City of Firebaugh and begins on the west end at an existing interchange of I-5 with Shields Avenue and runs eastward 18 miles then dips southeasterly just west of Mendota, to bypass the city. Variation 1B would bypass the city of Kerman to the north. Variation 1C would bypass both Kerman and Rolinda. The Southern Route Alternative (Alternative 2) extends 49 miles beginning at a point where Belmont Avenue would intersect I-5, follows the same alignment as Alternative 1 until just east of State Route 33 (SR 33), then runs northeasterly to generally follow the McKinley Avenue, Belmont Avenue, and Nielsen Avenue alignments to join the existing SR 180 freeway. The Northern Route Alternative (Alternative 3) extends 50 miles beginning at an existing interchange of I-5 with Shields Avenue and runs eastward 18 miles to SR 33 north of Mendota. From SR 33, the route continues eastward across agricultural land, the Mendota Pool Park and the Fresno Slough, and generally parallel to the south of the San Joaquin River/Madera County line. The route veers southeasterly to coincide with Alternative 2 for the remainder of the alignment. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The formal adoption of a route would enable planning for future transportation projects to improve mobility east and west through the center of Fresno County and the San Joaquin Valley, connecting the cities of Fresno, Kerman, Mendota, and Firebaugh and the unincorporated community of Rolinda. Future improvements would provide: adequate capacity for the regional movement of people and goods; continuity for east-west regional travel; improved accessibility and shorter travel times between Westside communities; and improved safety. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Conversion of farmland would be substantial given the study area location. Adverse impacts could occur to visual/aesthetic resources and biological resources such as wetlands and threatened and endangered species, including blunt-nosed leopard lizard, San Joaquin woollythreads, giant kangaroo rat, Fresno kangaroo rat, San Joaquin kit fox, giant garter snake, greater sandhill crane, and Swainsons hawk. Impacts would occur to parkland, cultural resources, floodplains, paleontological resources, and noise levels, and future projects may also displace numerous residences and businesses. An historic farmhouse, parks and recreation facilities, and wildlife refuges could be adversely impacted by the future projects. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110085, 444 pages and maps, March 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Birds KW - Cultural Resources KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Land Use KW - Noise KW - Paleontological Sites KW - Parks KW - Preserves KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Visual Resources KW - California KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126684?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=STATE+ROUTE+180+WESTSIDE+EXPRESSWAY+ROUTE+ADOPTION+STUDY%2C+FRESNO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=STATE+ROUTE+180+WESTSIDE+EXPRESSWAY+ROUTE+ADOPTION+STUDY%2C+FRESNO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - California Department of Transportation, Fresno, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 180 WESTSIDE EXPRESSWAY ROUTE ADOPTION STUDY, FRESNO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 863888958; 14841 AB - PURPOSE: The adoption of a route for a four-lane expressway for State Route 180 (SR 180) from Interstate 5 (I-5) to the western terminus of SR 180, in western Fresno County, California is proposed. The study area is located west of the city of Fresno, from Whitesbridge Avenue on the south, nearly to the San Joaquin River on the north, and from I-5 on the west to the end of the freeway portion of SR 180 near Valentine Avenue on the east. Agricultural landscapes typical of Central Valley predominate and include flat cropland, vineyards, orchards, and some feedlots and dairies. There is no reliable and continuous regional east-west highway between Fresno and I-5 under current conditions. By 2030, the easternmost section of existing SR 180 (Whitesbridge Avenue) between Kerman and Fresno would have inadequate capacity to accommodate travel demand. SR 180 is primarily a two-lane conventional highway within the study area. This tier I draft EIS considers three proposed route adoption alternatives together with additional route variations and a No Action Alternative. Alternative 1 extends 48 miles across the valley, beginning at a point where a westerly extension of Belmont Avenue would intersect I-5. The alignment proceeds east crossing the California Aqueduct and turns southeast between San Diego Avenue and Ohio Avenue, passing south of the City of Mendota. This alternative generally follows existing SR 180 until it reaches a connection with the existing SR 180 freeway terminus at Brawley Avenue. Variation 1A (Shields Avenue/West Mendota Bypass) would provide additional opportunities for access for the City of Firebaugh and begins on the west end at an existing interchange of I-5 with Shields Avenue and runs eastward 18 miles then dips southeasterly just west of Mendota, to bypass the city. Variation 1B would bypass the city of Kerman to the north. Variation 1C would bypass both Kerman and Rolinda. The Southern Route Alternative (Alternative 2) extends 49 miles beginning at a point where Belmont Avenue would intersect I-5, follows the same alignment as Alternative 1 until just east of State Route 33 (SR 33), then runs northeasterly to generally follow the McKinley Avenue, Belmont Avenue, and Nielsen Avenue alignments to join the existing SR 180 freeway. The Northern Route Alternative (Alternative 3) extends 50 miles beginning at an existing interchange of I-5 with Shields Avenue and runs eastward 18 miles to SR 33 north of Mendota. From SR 33, the route continues eastward across agricultural land, the Mendota Pool Park and the Fresno Slough, and generally parallel to the south of the San Joaquin River/Madera County line. The route veers southeasterly to coincide with Alternative 2 for the remainder of the alignment. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The formal adoption of a route would enable planning for future transportation projects to improve mobility east and west through the center of Fresno County and the San Joaquin Valley, connecting the cities of Fresno, Kerman, Mendota, and Firebaugh and the unincorporated community of Rolinda. Future improvements would provide: adequate capacity for the regional movement of people and goods; continuity for east-west regional travel; improved accessibility and shorter travel times between Westside communities; and improved safety. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Conversion of farmland would be substantial given the study area location. Adverse impacts could occur to visual/aesthetic resources and biological resources such as wetlands and threatened and endangered species, including blunt-nosed leopard lizard, San Joaquin woollythreads, giant kangaroo rat, Fresno kangaroo rat, San Joaquin kit fox, giant garter snake, greater sandhill crane, and Swainsons hawk. Impacts would occur to parkland, cultural resources, floodplains, paleontological resources, and noise levels, and future projects may also displace numerous residences and businesses. An historic farmhouse, parks and recreation facilities, and wildlife refuges could be adversely impacted by the future projects. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110085, 444 pages and maps, March 25, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Birds KW - Cultural Resources KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Land Use KW - Noise KW - Paleontological Sites KW - Parks KW - Preserves KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Visual Resources KW - California KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/863888958?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=STATE+ROUTE+180+WESTSIDE+EXPRESSWAY+ROUTE+ADOPTION+STUDY%2C+FRESNO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=STATE+ROUTE+180+WESTSIDE+EXPRESSWAY+ROUTE+ADOPTION+STUDY%2C+FRESNO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - California Department of Transportation, Fresno, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Resolution of aviation forensic toxicology findings with the aid of DNA profiling. AN - 857131397; 20674200 AB - Body components of aviation accident fatalities are often scattered, disintegrated, commingled, contaminated, and/or putrefied at accident scenes. These situations may impose difficulties in victim identification/tissue matching. The prevalence of misidentification in relation to aviation accident forensic toxicology has not been well established. Therefore, the Civil Aerospace Medical Institute (CAMI) toxicology database was searched for the 1998-2008 period for those cases wherein DNA profiling was performed to resolve identity issue of the samples submitted to CAMI for toxicological evaluation. During this period, biological samples from the casualties of a total of 3523 accidents were submitted to CAMI. The submitted samples were primarily from pilots. Out of the 3523 accidents, at least, one fatality had occurred in 3366 (≈ 96%) accidents; thus, these accidents were considered fatal accidents. Accordingly, biological samples from 3319 pilots (3319 of the 3366 accidents) were received at CAMI for toxicological testing. Of these 3319 pilots, 3275 (≈ 99%) were fatally injured. DNA profiling was performed in 15 (≈ 0.5%) of the 3319 accidents. The profiling was conducted upon the requests of families in two accidents, accident investigators in three, and pathologists in four. In six accidents, contradictory toxicological findings led CAMI to initiate DNA profiling. The requests made by families and investigators were primarily triggered by inconsistency between the toxicological results and the history of drug use of the victims, while by pathologists because of commingling of samples. In three (20%) of the 15 accidents, at least one submitted sample was misidentified or mislabeled. The present study demonstrated that the number of aviation accident cases requiring DNA profiling was small and this DNA approach was effectively applied in resolving aviation toxicology findings associated with those accidents. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd. JF - Forensic science international AU - Chaturvedi, Arvind K AU - Craft, Kristi J AU - Kupfer, Doris M AU - Burian, Dennis AU - Canfield, Dennis V AD - Bioaeronautical Sciences Research Laboratory, AAM-610, Aerospace Medical Research Division, Civil Aerospace Medical Institute, Federal Aviation Administration, US Department of Transportation, PO Box 25082, Oklahoma City, OK 73125-5066, USA. arvind.chaturvedi@faa.gov Y1 - 2011/03/20/ PY - 2011 DA - 2011 Mar 20 SP - 81 EP - 86 VL - 206 IS - 1-3 KW - Genetic Markers KW - 0 KW - Index Medicus KW - United States KW - Humans KW - Databases as Topic KW - Forensic Pathology KW - Sex Determination Analysis KW - Quality Control KW - Accidents, Aviation KW - Substance Abuse Detection KW - Forensic Toxicology KW - DNA Fingerprinting UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/857131397?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Atoxline&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Forensic+science+international&rft.atitle=Resolution+of+aviation+forensic+toxicology+findings+with+the+aid+of+DNA+profiling.&rft.au=Chaturvedi%2C+Arvind+K%3BCraft%2C+Kristi+J%3BKupfer%2C+Doris+M%3BBurian%2C+Dennis%3BCanfield%2C+Dennis+V&rft.aulast=Chaturvedi&rft.aufirst=Arvind&rft.date=2011-03-20&rft.volume=206&rft.issue=1-3&rft.spage=81&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Forensic+science+international&rft.issn=1872-6283&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016%2Fj.forsciint.2010.06.024 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date completed - 2011-07-26 N1 - Date created - 2011-03-14 N1 - Date revised - 2017-01-13 N1 - Last updated - 2017-01-18 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2010.06.024 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EXTENSION OF F-LINE STREETCAR SERVICE TO FORT MASON CENTER, GOLDEN GATE NATIONAL RECREATION AREA, SAN FRANCISCO MARITIME NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK, CALIFORNIA. [Part 7 of 7] T2 - EXTENSION OF F-LINE STREETCAR SERVICE TO FORT MASON CENTER, GOLDEN GATE NATIONAL RECREATION AREA, SAN FRANCISCO MARITIME NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873126837; 14835-9_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the F-Market & Wharves Line (F-line) streetcar service from Fishermans Wharf through the San Francisco Maritime National Historical Park (SF Maritime NHP) and the Golden Gate National Recreation Area (GGNRA) to Fort Mason Center, in San Francisco, California is proposed. The GGNRA and the SF Maritime NHP are two separate National Park Service units in San Franciscos northeastern waterfront; SF Maritime NHP is adjacent to the GGNRA, which includes Fort Mason. The 50-acre SF Maritime NHP includes the Maritime Museum and a Senior Center, Aquatic Park, Municipal Pier, Hyde Street Pier, and a collection of National Historic Landmark vessels. The study area is bounded by Mason Street on the east, Bay Street on the south, Fillmore Street on the west and the bayfront, including the piers and parklands within the east-west boundary, on the north. Part of the SF Maritime NHP has been designated as the Aquatic Park National Historic Landmark District (NHLD). Fort Mason, which includes the San Francisco Port of Embarkation NHLD, consists of Upper Fort Mason and Lower Fort Mason. Lower Fort Mason encompasses the historic piers and buildings in which the nonprofit Fort Mason Center is located. SF Maritime NHP has four million visitors each year and relies on the availability of on-street or commercial parking lots available for the Fishermans Wharf area. The lack of a direct transit connection between the hotels in the Fishermans Wharf area and Fort Mason Center limits the potential of the center as an event destination. The study area is divided into four segments: the 2,500-foot In-Street segment along Beach Street would connect to the terminus of the existing F-line at Jones Street; the 750-foot Transition segment would cross Van Ness Avenue; the existing 1,500-foot tunnel segment runs underneath Fort Mason and the Great Meadow; and the Turnaround, a loop of track which would allow for westbound streetcars to turnaround before returning eastbound. The proposed action (Alternative 2) and a No Action Alternative (Alternative 1) are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action would extend the F-line from Jones Street to Fort Mason Center and includes a preferred In-Street alignment, Transition, Fort Mason Tunnel, and Turnaround segments. The Turnaround segment has two options, Alternative 2A: North Loop (located in the Fort Mason Center parking lot) and Alternative 2B: South Loop (located in Great Meadow). The In-Street Segment presents both mixed traffic and semi-exclusive options (autos do or do not share track right-of-way); however these would be determined during the final design phase. The extension would include approximately 0.85 mile of new rail track; associated features such as signals, crossings, wires and poles; eight to nine new platforms; new designated stops; retrofitting of the historic State Belt Railroad tunnel (Fort Mason Tunnel); and construction of a track turnaround in the Fort Mason Center parking lot or Great Meadow. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The extension would provide park visitors and transit-dependent residents with high-quality rail transit that improves transportation access and mobility between existing streetcar service at Fishermans Wharf and Fort Mason Center in GGNRA. The streetcar service would have connection to the regional transit rail services, while respecting the settings, context, and resources of two national park destinations and avoiding or minimizing adverse effects to National Historic Landmarks and National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) listed or eligible properties. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would result in major adverse impacts from noise and vibration to the residential units on the corner of Hyde and Beach Streets and at Ghirardelli Square as well as hotels along Beach Street and the Maritime Museum. LEGAL MANDATES: National Park Service Organic Act of 1916 (16 U.S.C. 1 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110079, 590 pages, March 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Historic Districts KW - National Parks KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Tunnels (Railroads) KW - California KW - Golden Gate National Recreation Area KW - San Francisco Maritime National Historical Park KW - National Park Service Organic Act of 1916, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126837?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EXTENSION+OF+F-LINE+STREETCAR+SERVICE+TO+FORT+MASON+CENTER%2C+GOLDEN+GATE+NATIONAL+RECREATION+AREA%2C+SAN+FRANCISCO+MARITIME+NATIONAL+HISTORICAL+PARK%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=EXTENSION+OF+F-LINE+STREETCAR+SERVICE+TO+FORT+MASON+CENTER%2C+GOLDEN+GATE+NATIONAL+RECREATION+AREA%2C+SAN+FRANCISCO+MARITIME+NATIONAL+HISTORICAL+PARK%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, National Park Service, San Francisco, California; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EXTENSION OF F-LINE STREETCAR SERVICE TO FORT MASON CENTER, GOLDEN GATE NATIONAL RECREATION AREA, SAN FRANCISCO MARITIME NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK, CALIFORNIA. [Part 6 of 7] T2 - EXTENSION OF F-LINE STREETCAR SERVICE TO FORT MASON CENTER, GOLDEN GATE NATIONAL RECREATION AREA, SAN FRANCISCO MARITIME NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873126832; 14835-9_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the F-Market & Wharves Line (F-line) streetcar service from Fishermans Wharf through the San Francisco Maritime National Historical Park (SF Maritime NHP) and the Golden Gate National Recreation Area (GGNRA) to Fort Mason Center, in San Francisco, California is proposed. The GGNRA and the SF Maritime NHP are two separate National Park Service units in San Franciscos northeastern waterfront; SF Maritime NHP is adjacent to the GGNRA, which includes Fort Mason. The 50-acre SF Maritime NHP includes the Maritime Museum and a Senior Center, Aquatic Park, Municipal Pier, Hyde Street Pier, and a collection of National Historic Landmark vessels. The study area is bounded by Mason Street on the east, Bay Street on the south, Fillmore Street on the west and the bayfront, including the piers and parklands within the east-west boundary, on the north. Part of the SF Maritime NHP has been designated as the Aquatic Park National Historic Landmark District (NHLD). Fort Mason, which includes the San Francisco Port of Embarkation NHLD, consists of Upper Fort Mason and Lower Fort Mason. Lower Fort Mason encompasses the historic piers and buildings in which the nonprofit Fort Mason Center is located. SF Maritime NHP has four million visitors each year and relies on the availability of on-street or commercial parking lots available for the Fishermans Wharf area. The lack of a direct transit connection between the hotels in the Fishermans Wharf area and Fort Mason Center limits the potential of the center as an event destination. The study area is divided into four segments: the 2,500-foot In-Street segment along Beach Street would connect to the terminus of the existing F-line at Jones Street; the 750-foot Transition segment would cross Van Ness Avenue; the existing 1,500-foot tunnel segment runs underneath Fort Mason and the Great Meadow; and the Turnaround, a loop of track which would allow for westbound streetcars to turnaround before returning eastbound. The proposed action (Alternative 2) and a No Action Alternative (Alternative 1) are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action would extend the F-line from Jones Street to Fort Mason Center and includes a preferred In-Street alignment, Transition, Fort Mason Tunnel, and Turnaround segments. The Turnaround segment has two options, Alternative 2A: North Loop (located in the Fort Mason Center parking lot) and Alternative 2B: South Loop (located in Great Meadow). The In-Street Segment presents both mixed traffic and semi-exclusive options (autos do or do not share track right-of-way); however these would be determined during the final design phase. The extension would include approximately 0.85 mile of new rail track; associated features such as signals, crossings, wires and poles; eight to nine new platforms; new designated stops; retrofitting of the historic State Belt Railroad tunnel (Fort Mason Tunnel); and construction of a track turnaround in the Fort Mason Center parking lot or Great Meadow. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The extension would provide park visitors and transit-dependent residents with high-quality rail transit that improves transportation access and mobility between existing streetcar service at Fishermans Wharf and Fort Mason Center in GGNRA. The streetcar service would have connection to the regional transit rail services, while respecting the settings, context, and resources of two national park destinations and avoiding or minimizing adverse effects to National Historic Landmarks and National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) listed or eligible properties. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would result in major adverse impacts from noise and vibration to the residential units on the corner of Hyde and Beach Streets and at Ghirardelli Square as well as hotels along Beach Street and the Maritime Museum. LEGAL MANDATES: National Park Service Organic Act of 1916 (16 U.S.C. 1 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110079, 590 pages, March 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Historic Districts KW - National Parks KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Tunnels (Railroads) KW - California KW - Golden Gate National Recreation Area KW - San Francisco Maritime National Historical Park KW - National Park Service Organic Act of 1916, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126832?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EXTENSION+OF+F-LINE+STREETCAR+SERVICE+TO+FORT+MASON+CENTER%2C+GOLDEN+GATE+NATIONAL+RECREATION+AREA%2C+SAN+FRANCISCO+MARITIME+NATIONAL+HISTORICAL+PARK%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=EXTENSION+OF+F-LINE+STREETCAR+SERVICE+TO+FORT+MASON+CENTER%2C+GOLDEN+GATE+NATIONAL+RECREATION+AREA%2C+SAN+FRANCISCO+MARITIME+NATIONAL+HISTORICAL+PARK%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, National Park Service, San Francisco, California; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EXTENSION OF F-LINE STREETCAR SERVICE TO FORT MASON CENTER, GOLDEN GATE NATIONAL RECREATION AREA, SAN FRANCISCO MARITIME NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK, CALIFORNIA. [Part 5 of 7] T2 - EXTENSION OF F-LINE STREETCAR SERVICE TO FORT MASON CENTER, GOLDEN GATE NATIONAL RECREATION AREA, SAN FRANCISCO MARITIME NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873126821; 14835-9_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the F-Market & Wharves Line (F-line) streetcar service from Fishermans Wharf through the San Francisco Maritime National Historical Park (SF Maritime NHP) and the Golden Gate National Recreation Area (GGNRA) to Fort Mason Center, in San Francisco, California is proposed. The GGNRA and the SF Maritime NHP are two separate National Park Service units in San Franciscos northeastern waterfront; SF Maritime NHP is adjacent to the GGNRA, which includes Fort Mason. The 50-acre SF Maritime NHP includes the Maritime Museum and a Senior Center, Aquatic Park, Municipal Pier, Hyde Street Pier, and a collection of National Historic Landmark vessels. The study area is bounded by Mason Street on the east, Bay Street on the south, Fillmore Street on the west and the bayfront, including the piers and parklands within the east-west boundary, on the north. Part of the SF Maritime NHP has been designated as the Aquatic Park National Historic Landmark District (NHLD). Fort Mason, which includes the San Francisco Port of Embarkation NHLD, consists of Upper Fort Mason and Lower Fort Mason. Lower Fort Mason encompasses the historic piers and buildings in which the nonprofit Fort Mason Center is located. SF Maritime NHP has four million visitors each year and relies on the availability of on-street or commercial parking lots available for the Fishermans Wharf area. The lack of a direct transit connection between the hotels in the Fishermans Wharf area and Fort Mason Center limits the potential of the center as an event destination. The study area is divided into four segments: the 2,500-foot In-Street segment along Beach Street would connect to the terminus of the existing F-line at Jones Street; the 750-foot Transition segment would cross Van Ness Avenue; the existing 1,500-foot tunnel segment runs underneath Fort Mason and the Great Meadow; and the Turnaround, a loop of track which would allow for westbound streetcars to turnaround before returning eastbound. The proposed action (Alternative 2) and a No Action Alternative (Alternative 1) are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action would extend the F-line from Jones Street to Fort Mason Center and includes a preferred In-Street alignment, Transition, Fort Mason Tunnel, and Turnaround segments. The Turnaround segment has two options, Alternative 2A: North Loop (located in the Fort Mason Center parking lot) and Alternative 2B: South Loop (located in Great Meadow). The In-Street Segment presents both mixed traffic and semi-exclusive options (autos do or do not share track right-of-way); however these would be determined during the final design phase. The extension would include approximately 0.85 mile of new rail track; associated features such as signals, crossings, wires and poles; eight to nine new platforms; new designated stops; retrofitting of the historic State Belt Railroad tunnel (Fort Mason Tunnel); and construction of a track turnaround in the Fort Mason Center parking lot or Great Meadow. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The extension would provide park visitors and transit-dependent residents with high-quality rail transit that improves transportation access and mobility between existing streetcar service at Fishermans Wharf and Fort Mason Center in GGNRA. The streetcar service would have connection to the regional transit rail services, while respecting the settings, context, and resources of two national park destinations and avoiding or minimizing adverse effects to National Historic Landmarks and National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) listed or eligible properties. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would result in major adverse impacts from noise and vibration to the residential units on the corner of Hyde and Beach Streets and at Ghirardelli Square as well as hotels along Beach Street and the Maritime Museum. LEGAL MANDATES: National Park Service Organic Act of 1916 (16 U.S.C. 1 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110079, 590 pages, March 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Historic Districts KW - National Parks KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Tunnels (Railroads) KW - California KW - Golden Gate National Recreation Area KW - San Francisco Maritime National Historical Park KW - National Park Service Organic Act of 1916, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126821?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EXTENSION+OF+F-LINE+STREETCAR+SERVICE+TO+FORT+MASON+CENTER%2C+GOLDEN+GATE+NATIONAL+RECREATION+AREA%2C+SAN+FRANCISCO+MARITIME+NATIONAL+HISTORICAL+PARK%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=EXTENSION+OF+F-LINE+STREETCAR+SERVICE+TO+FORT+MASON+CENTER%2C+GOLDEN+GATE+NATIONAL+RECREATION+AREA%2C+SAN+FRANCISCO+MARITIME+NATIONAL+HISTORICAL+PARK%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, National Park Service, San Francisco, California; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EXTENSION OF F-LINE STREETCAR SERVICE TO FORT MASON CENTER, GOLDEN GATE NATIONAL RECREATION AREA, SAN FRANCISCO MARITIME NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK, CALIFORNIA. [Part 4 of 7] T2 - EXTENSION OF F-LINE STREETCAR SERVICE TO FORT MASON CENTER, GOLDEN GATE NATIONAL RECREATION AREA, SAN FRANCISCO MARITIME NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873126818; 14835-9_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the F-Market & Wharves Line (F-line) streetcar service from Fishermans Wharf through the San Francisco Maritime National Historical Park (SF Maritime NHP) and the Golden Gate National Recreation Area (GGNRA) to Fort Mason Center, in San Francisco, California is proposed. The GGNRA and the SF Maritime NHP are two separate National Park Service units in San Franciscos northeastern waterfront; SF Maritime NHP is adjacent to the GGNRA, which includes Fort Mason. The 50-acre SF Maritime NHP includes the Maritime Museum and a Senior Center, Aquatic Park, Municipal Pier, Hyde Street Pier, and a collection of National Historic Landmark vessels. The study area is bounded by Mason Street on the east, Bay Street on the south, Fillmore Street on the west and the bayfront, including the piers and parklands within the east-west boundary, on the north. Part of the SF Maritime NHP has been designated as the Aquatic Park National Historic Landmark District (NHLD). Fort Mason, which includes the San Francisco Port of Embarkation NHLD, consists of Upper Fort Mason and Lower Fort Mason. Lower Fort Mason encompasses the historic piers and buildings in which the nonprofit Fort Mason Center is located. SF Maritime NHP has four million visitors each year and relies on the availability of on-street or commercial parking lots available for the Fishermans Wharf area. The lack of a direct transit connection between the hotels in the Fishermans Wharf area and Fort Mason Center limits the potential of the center as an event destination. The study area is divided into four segments: the 2,500-foot In-Street segment along Beach Street would connect to the terminus of the existing F-line at Jones Street; the 750-foot Transition segment would cross Van Ness Avenue; the existing 1,500-foot tunnel segment runs underneath Fort Mason and the Great Meadow; and the Turnaround, a loop of track which would allow for westbound streetcars to turnaround before returning eastbound. The proposed action (Alternative 2) and a No Action Alternative (Alternative 1) are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action would extend the F-line from Jones Street to Fort Mason Center and includes a preferred In-Street alignment, Transition, Fort Mason Tunnel, and Turnaround segments. The Turnaround segment has two options, Alternative 2A: North Loop (located in the Fort Mason Center parking lot) and Alternative 2B: South Loop (located in Great Meadow). The In-Street Segment presents both mixed traffic and semi-exclusive options (autos do or do not share track right-of-way); however these would be determined during the final design phase. The extension would include approximately 0.85 mile of new rail track; associated features such as signals, crossings, wires and poles; eight to nine new platforms; new designated stops; retrofitting of the historic State Belt Railroad tunnel (Fort Mason Tunnel); and construction of a track turnaround in the Fort Mason Center parking lot or Great Meadow. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The extension would provide park visitors and transit-dependent residents with high-quality rail transit that improves transportation access and mobility between existing streetcar service at Fishermans Wharf and Fort Mason Center in GGNRA. The streetcar service would have connection to the regional transit rail services, while respecting the settings, context, and resources of two national park destinations and avoiding or minimizing adverse effects to National Historic Landmarks and National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) listed or eligible properties. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would result in major adverse impacts from noise and vibration to the residential units on the corner of Hyde and Beach Streets and at Ghirardelli Square as well as hotels along Beach Street and the Maritime Museum. LEGAL MANDATES: National Park Service Organic Act of 1916 (16 U.S.C. 1 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110079, 590 pages, March 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Historic Districts KW - National Parks KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Tunnels (Railroads) KW - California KW - Golden Gate National Recreation Area KW - San Francisco Maritime National Historical Park KW - National Park Service Organic Act of 1916, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126818?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EXTENSION+OF+F-LINE+STREETCAR+SERVICE+TO+FORT+MASON+CENTER%2C+GOLDEN+GATE+NATIONAL+RECREATION+AREA%2C+SAN+FRANCISCO+MARITIME+NATIONAL+HISTORICAL+PARK%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=EXTENSION+OF+F-LINE+STREETCAR+SERVICE+TO+FORT+MASON+CENTER%2C+GOLDEN+GATE+NATIONAL+RECREATION+AREA%2C+SAN+FRANCISCO+MARITIME+NATIONAL+HISTORICAL+PARK%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, National Park Service, San Francisco, California; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EXTENSION OF F-LINE STREETCAR SERVICE TO FORT MASON CENTER, GOLDEN GATE NATIONAL RECREATION AREA, SAN FRANCISCO MARITIME NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK, CALIFORNIA. [Part 3 of 7] T2 - EXTENSION OF F-LINE STREETCAR SERVICE TO FORT MASON CENTER, GOLDEN GATE NATIONAL RECREATION AREA, SAN FRANCISCO MARITIME NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873126813; 14835-9_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the F-Market & Wharves Line (F-line) streetcar service from Fishermans Wharf through the San Francisco Maritime National Historical Park (SF Maritime NHP) and the Golden Gate National Recreation Area (GGNRA) to Fort Mason Center, in San Francisco, California is proposed. The GGNRA and the SF Maritime NHP are two separate National Park Service units in San Franciscos northeastern waterfront; SF Maritime NHP is adjacent to the GGNRA, which includes Fort Mason. The 50-acre SF Maritime NHP includes the Maritime Museum and a Senior Center, Aquatic Park, Municipal Pier, Hyde Street Pier, and a collection of National Historic Landmark vessels. The study area is bounded by Mason Street on the east, Bay Street on the south, Fillmore Street on the west and the bayfront, including the piers and parklands within the east-west boundary, on the north. Part of the SF Maritime NHP has been designated as the Aquatic Park National Historic Landmark District (NHLD). Fort Mason, which includes the San Francisco Port of Embarkation NHLD, consists of Upper Fort Mason and Lower Fort Mason. Lower Fort Mason encompasses the historic piers and buildings in which the nonprofit Fort Mason Center is located. SF Maritime NHP has four million visitors each year and relies on the availability of on-street or commercial parking lots available for the Fishermans Wharf area. The lack of a direct transit connection between the hotels in the Fishermans Wharf area and Fort Mason Center limits the potential of the center as an event destination. The study area is divided into four segments: the 2,500-foot In-Street segment along Beach Street would connect to the terminus of the existing F-line at Jones Street; the 750-foot Transition segment would cross Van Ness Avenue; the existing 1,500-foot tunnel segment runs underneath Fort Mason and the Great Meadow; and the Turnaround, a loop of track which would allow for westbound streetcars to turnaround before returning eastbound. The proposed action (Alternative 2) and a No Action Alternative (Alternative 1) are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action would extend the F-line from Jones Street to Fort Mason Center and includes a preferred In-Street alignment, Transition, Fort Mason Tunnel, and Turnaround segments. The Turnaround segment has two options, Alternative 2A: North Loop (located in the Fort Mason Center parking lot) and Alternative 2B: South Loop (located in Great Meadow). The In-Street Segment presents both mixed traffic and semi-exclusive options (autos do or do not share track right-of-way); however these would be determined during the final design phase. The extension would include approximately 0.85 mile of new rail track; associated features such as signals, crossings, wires and poles; eight to nine new platforms; new designated stops; retrofitting of the historic State Belt Railroad tunnel (Fort Mason Tunnel); and construction of a track turnaround in the Fort Mason Center parking lot or Great Meadow. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The extension would provide park visitors and transit-dependent residents with high-quality rail transit that improves transportation access and mobility between existing streetcar service at Fishermans Wharf and Fort Mason Center in GGNRA. The streetcar service would have connection to the regional transit rail services, while respecting the settings, context, and resources of two national park destinations and avoiding or minimizing adverse effects to National Historic Landmarks and National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) listed or eligible properties. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would result in major adverse impacts from noise and vibration to the residential units on the corner of Hyde and Beach Streets and at Ghirardelli Square as well as hotels along Beach Street and the Maritime Museum. LEGAL MANDATES: National Park Service Organic Act of 1916 (16 U.S.C. 1 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110079, 590 pages, March 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Historic Districts KW - National Parks KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Tunnels (Railroads) KW - California KW - Golden Gate National Recreation Area KW - San Francisco Maritime National Historical Park KW - National Park Service Organic Act of 1916, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126813?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EXTENSION+OF+F-LINE+STREETCAR+SERVICE+TO+FORT+MASON+CENTER%2C+GOLDEN+GATE+NATIONAL+RECREATION+AREA%2C+SAN+FRANCISCO+MARITIME+NATIONAL+HISTORICAL+PARK%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=EXTENSION+OF+F-LINE+STREETCAR+SERVICE+TO+FORT+MASON+CENTER%2C+GOLDEN+GATE+NATIONAL+RECREATION+AREA%2C+SAN+FRANCISCO+MARITIME+NATIONAL+HISTORICAL+PARK%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, National Park Service, San Francisco, California; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EXTENSION OF F-LINE STREETCAR SERVICE TO FORT MASON CENTER, GOLDEN GATE NATIONAL RECREATION AREA, SAN FRANCISCO MARITIME NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK, CALIFORNIA. [Part 2 of 7] T2 - EXTENSION OF F-LINE STREETCAR SERVICE TO FORT MASON CENTER, GOLDEN GATE NATIONAL RECREATION AREA, SAN FRANCISCO MARITIME NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873126806; 14835-9_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the F-Market & Wharves Line (F-line) streetcar service from Fishermans Wharf through the San Francisco Maritime National Historical Park (SF Maritime NHP) and the Golden Gate National Recreation Area (GGNRA) to Fort Mason Center, in San Francisco, California is proposed. The GGNRA and the SF Maritime NHP are two separate National Park Service units in San Franciscos northeastern waterfront; SF Maritime NHP is adjacent to the GGNRA, which includes Fort Mason. The 50-acre SF Maritime NHP includes the Maritime Museum and a Senior Center, Aquatic Park, Municipal Pier, Hyde Street Pier, and a collection of National Historic Landmark vessels. The study area is bounded by Mason Street on the east, Bay Street on the south, Fillmore Street on the west and the bayfront, including the piers and parklands within the east-west boundary, on the north. Part of the SF Maritime NHP has been designated as the Aquatic Park National Historic Landmark District (NHLD). Fort Mason, which includes the San Francisco Port of Embarkation NHLD, consists of Upper Fort Mason and Lower Fort Mason. Lower Fort Mason encompasses the historic piers and buildings in which the nonprofit Fort Mason Center is located. SF Maritime NHP has four million visitors each year and relies on the availability of on-street or commercial parking lots available for the Fishermans Wharf area. The lack of a direct transit connection between the hotels in the Fishermans Wharf area and Fort Mason Center limits the potential of the center as an event destination. The study area is divided into four segments: the 2,500-foot In-Street segment along Beach Street would connect to the terminus of the existing F-line at Jones Street; the 750-foot Transition segment would cross Van Ness Avenue; the existing 1,500-foot tunnel segment runs underneath Fort Mason and the Great Meadow; and the Turnaround, a loop of track which would allow for westbound streetcars to turnaround before returning eastbound. The proposed action (Alternative 2) and a No Action Alternative (Alternative 1) are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action would extend the F-line from Jones Street to Fort Mason Center and includes a preferred In-Street alignment, Transition, Fort Mason Tunnel, and Turnaround segments. The Turnaround segment has two options, Alternative 2A: North Loop (located in the Fort Mason Center parking lot) and Alternative 2B: South Loop (located in Great Meadow). The In-Street Segment presents both mixed traffic and semi-exclusive options (autos do or do not share track right-of-way); however these would be determined during the final design phase. The extension would include approximately 0.85 mile of new rail track; associated features such as signals, crossings, wires and poles; eight to nine new platforms; new designated stops; retrofitting of the historic State Belt Railroad tunnel (Fort Mason Tunnel); and construction of a track turnaround in the Fort Mason Center parking lot or Great Meadow. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The extension would provide park visitors and transit-dependent residents with high-quality rail transit that improves transportation access and mobility between existing streetcar service at Fishermans Wharf and Fort Mason Center in GGNRA. The streetcar service would have connection to the regional transit rail services, while respecting the settings, context, and resources of two national park destinations and avoiding or minimizing adverse effects to National Historic Landmarks and National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) listed or eligible properties. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would result in major adverse impacts from noise and vibration to the residential units on the corner of Hyde and Beach Streets and at Ghirardelli Square as well as hotels along Beach Street and the Maritime Museum. LEGAL MANDATES: National Park Service Organic Act of 1916 (16 U.S.C. 1 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110079, 590 pages, March 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Historic Districts KW - National Parks KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Tunnels (Railroads) KW - California KW - Golden Gate National Recreation Area KW - San Francisco Maritime National Historical Park KW - National Park Service Organic Act of 1916, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126806?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EXTENSION+OF+F-LINE+STREETCAR+SERVICE+TO+FORT+MASON+CENTER%2C+GOLDEN+GATE+NATIONAL+RECREATION+AREA%2C+SAN+FRANCISCO+MARITIME+NATIONAL+HISTORICAL+PARK%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=EXTENSION+OF+F-LINE+STREETCAR+SERVICE+TO+FORT+MASON+CENTER%2C+GOLDEN+GATE+NATIONAL+RECREATION+AREA%2C+SAN+FRANCISCO+MARITIME+NATIONAL+HISTORICAL+PARK%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, National Park Service, San Francisco, California; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EXTENSION OF F-LINE STREETCAR SERVICE TO FORT MASON CENTER, GOLDEN GATE NATIONAL RECREATION AREA, SAN FRANCISCO MARITIME NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK, CALIFORNIA. [Part 1 of 7] T2 - EXTENSION OF F-LINE STREETCAR SERVICE TO FORT MASON CENTER, GOLDEN GATE NATIONAL RECREATION AREA, SAN FRANCISCO MARITIME NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873126736; 14835-9_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the F-Market & Wharves Line (F-line) streetcar service from Fishermans Wharf through the San Francisco Maritime National Historical Park (SF Maritime NHP) and the Golden Gate National Recreation Area (GGNRA) to Fort Mason Center, in San Francisco, California is proposed. The GGNRA and the SF Maritime NHP are two separate National Park Service units in San Franciscos northeastern waterfront; SF Maritime NHP is adjacent to the GGNRA, which includes Fort Mason. The 50-acre SF Maritime NHP includes the Maritime Museum and a Senior Center, Aquatic Park, Municipal Pier, Hyde Street Pier, and a collection of National Historic Landmark vessels. The study area is bounded by Mason Street on the east, Bay Street on the south, Fillmore Street on the west and the bayfront, including the piers and parklands within the east-west boundary, on the north. Part of the SF Maritime NHP has been designated as the Aquatic Park National Historic Landmark District (NHLD). Fort Mason, which includes the San Francisco Port of Embarkation NHLD, consists of Upper Fort Mason and Lower Fort Mason. Lower Fort Mason encompasses the historic piers and buildings in which the nonprofit Fort Mason Center is located. SF Maritime NHP has four million visitors each year and relies on the availability of on-street or commercial parking lots available for the Fishermans Wharf area. The lack of a direct transit connection between the hotels in the Fishermans Wharf area and Fort Mason Center limits the potential of the center as an event destination. The study area is divided into four segments: the 2,500-foot In-Street segment along Beach Street would connect to the terminus of the existing F-line at Jones Street; the 750-foot Transition segment would cross Van Ness Avenue; the existing 1,500-foot tunnel segment runs underneath Fort Mason and the Great Meadow; and the Turnaround, a loop of track which would allow for westbound streetcars to turnaround before returning eastbound. The proposed action (Alternative 2) and a No Action Alternative (Alternative 1) are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action would extend the F-line from Jones Street to Fort Mason Center and includes a preferred In-Street alignment, Transition, Fort Mason Tunnel, and Turnaround segments. The Turnaround segment has two options, Alternative 2A: North Loop (located in the Fort Mason Center parking lot) and Alternative 2B: South Loop (located in Great Meadow). The In-Street Segment presents both mixed traffic and semi-exclusive options (autos do or do not share track right-of-way); however these would be determined during the final design phase. The extension would include approximately 0.85 mile of new rail track; associated features such as signals, crossings, wires and poles; eight to nine new platforms; new designated stops; retrofitting of the historic State Belt Railroad tunnel (Fort Mason Tunnel); and construction of a track turnaround in the Fort Mason Center parking lot or Great Meadow. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The extension would provide park visitors and transit-dependent residents with high-quality rail transit that improves transportation access and mobility between existing streetcar service at Fishermans Wharf and Fort Mason Center in GGNRA. The streetcar service would have connection to the regional transit rail services, while respecting the settings, context, and resources of two national park destinations and avoiding or minimizing adverse effects to National Historic Landmarks and National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) listed or eligible properties. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would result in major adverse impacts from noise and vibration to the residential units on the corner of Hyde and Beach Streets and at Ghirardelli Square as well as hotels along Beach Street and the Maritime Museum. LEGAL MANDATES: National Park Service Organic Act of 1916 (16 U.S.C. 1 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110079, 590 pages, March 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Historic Districts KW - National Parks KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Tunnels (Railroads) KW - California KW - Golden Gate National Recreation Area KW - San Francisco Maritime National Historical Park KW - National Park Service Organic Act of 1916, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126736?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EXTENSION+OF+F-LINE+STREETCAR+SERVICE+TO+FORT+MASON+CENTER%2C+GOLDEN+GATE+NATIONAL+RECREATION+AREA%2C+SAN+FRANCISCO+MARITIME+NATIONAL+HISTORICAL+PARK%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=EXTENSION+OF+F-LINE+STREETCAR+SERVICE+TO+FORT+MASON+CENTER%2C+GOLDEN+GATE+NATIONAL+RECREATION+AREA%2C+SAN+FRANCISCO+MARITIME+NATIONAL+HISTORICAL+PARK%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, National Park Service, San Francisco, California; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EXTENSION OF F-LINE STREETCAR SERVICE TO FORT MASON CENTER, GOLDEN GATE NATIONAL RECREATION AREA, SAN FRANCISCO MARITIME NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK, CALIFORNIA. AN - 863888951; 14835 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the F-Market & Wharves Line (F-line) streetcar service from Fishermans Wharf through the San Francisco Maritime National Historical Park (SF Maritime NHP) and the Golden Gate National Recreation Area (GGNRA) to Fort Mason Center, in San Francisco, California is proposed. The GGNRA and the SF Maritime NHP are two separate National Park Service units in San Franciscos northeastern waterfront; SF Maritime NHP is adjacent to the GGNRA, which includes Fort Mason. The 50-acre SF Maritime NHP includes the Maritime Museum and a Senior Center, Aquatic Park, Municipal Pier, Hyde Street Pier, and a collection of National Historic Landmark vessels. The study area is bounded by Mason Street on the east, Bay Street on the south, Fillmore Street on the west and the bayfront, including the piers and parklands within the east-west boundary, on the north. Part of the SF Maritime NHP has been designated as the Aquatic Park National Historic Landmark District (NHLD). Fort Mason, which includes the San Francisco Port of Embarkation NHLD, consists of Upper Fort Mason and Lower Fort Mason. Lower Fort Mason encompasses the historic piers and buildings in which the nonprofit Fort Mason Center is located. SF Maritime NHP has four million visitors each year and relies on the availability of on-street or commercial parking lots available for the Fishermans Wharf area. The lack of a direct transit connection between the hotels in the Fishermans Wharf area and Fort Mason Center limits the potential of the center as an event destination. The study area is divided into four segments: the 2,500-foot In-Street segment along Beach Street would connect to the terminus of the existing F-line at Jones Street; the 750-foot Transition segment would cross Van Ness Avenue; the existing 1,500-foot tunnel segment runs underneath Fort Mason and the Great Meadow; and the Turnaround, a loop of track which would allow for westbound streetcars to turnaround before returning eastbound. The proposed action (Alternative 2) and a No Action Alternative (Alternative 1) are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action would extend the F-line from Jones Street to Fort Mason Center and includes a preferred In-Street alignment, Transition, Fort Mason Tunnel, and Turnaround segments. The Turnaround segment has two options, Alternative 2A: North Loop (located in the Fort Mason Center parking lot) and Alternative 2B: South Loop (located in Great Meadow). The In-Street Segment presents both mixed traffic and semi-exclusive options (autos do or do not share track right-of-way); however these would be determined during the final design phase. The extension would include approximately 0.85 mile of new rail track; associated features such as signals, crossings, wires and poles; eight to nine new platforms; new designated stops; retrofitting of the historic State Belt Railroad tunnel (Fort Mason Tunnel); and construction of a track turnaround in the Fort Mason Center parking lot or Great Meadow. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The extension would provide park visitors and transit-dependent residents with high-quality rail transit that improves transportation access and mobility between existing streetcar service at Fishermans Wharf and Fort Mason Center in GGNRA. The streetcar service would have connection to the regional transit rail services, while respecting the settings, context, and resources of two national park destinations and avoiding or minimizing adverse effects to National Historic Landmarks and National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) listed or eligible properties. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would result in major adverse impacts from noise and vibration to the residential units on the corner of Hyde and Beach Streets and at Ghirardelli Square as well as hotels along Beach Street and the Maritime Museum. LEGAL MANDATES: National Park Service Organic Act of 1916 (16 U.S.C. 1 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110079, 590 pages, March 18, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Historic Districts KW - National Parks KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Tunnels (Railroads) KW - California KW - Golden Gate National Recreation Area KW - San Francisco Maritime National Historical Park KW - National Park Service Organic Act of 1916, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/863888951?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EXTENSION+OF+F-LINE+STREETCAR+SERVICE+TO+FORT+MASON+CENTER%2C+GOLDEN+GATE+NATIONAL+RECREATION+AREA%2C+SAN+FRANCISCO+MARITIME+NATIONAL+HISTORICAL+PARK%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=EXTENSION+OF+F-LINE+STREETCAR+SERVICE+TO+FORT+MASON+CENTER%2C+GOLDEN+GATE+NATIONAL+RECREATION+AREA%2C+SAN+FRANCISCO+MARITIME+NATIONAL+HISTORICAL+PARK%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, National Park Service, San Francisco, California; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 39 of 39] T2 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873130757; 14829-3_0039 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements along the 144-mile-long Interstate 70 (I-70) Mountain Corridor between Glenwood Springs and State Route 470 (C-470), Garfield, Eagle, Summit, Clear Creek and Jefferson counties, Colorado are proposed. The I-70 highway is the only east-west interstate to cross Colorado, directly serves more than 20 communities and a number of major ski resorts, provides access to the White River National Forest and the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests, and is an important freight corridor. Population growth in the Corridor and in the Denver metropolitan area has increased traffic volumes and recreational travelers currently experience substantial delays on weekends and holidays on the eastern side of the corridor while the western side experiences work trip delays during the week. This project began in 2000 and a revised programmatic draft EIS was issued in 2004. Twenty-one action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this first tier programmatic final EIS. The preferred alternative consists of near-term and general long-term improvements for the Corridor to meet the travel demand for 2050 and address immediate Corridor needs. To address future uncertainties, trigger points and stakeholder involvement would be used to reassess needs and to determine the most appropriate transportation improvements to meet future demand. The preferred alternative would implement a multimodal solution and include non-infrastructure related components, an advanced guideway system, and highway improvements. A specific advanced guideway system technology would be determined in subsequent study or a Tier 2 process and would be deployed to provide transit service from the Eagle County Regional Airport to C-470, a distance of 118 miles. It would be a fully elevated transit system on two tracks aligned to the north, south, or in the median of I-70. The system would connect to the regional transportation district network in Jefferson County and local and regional transit services at most of the 15 proposed transit stations along the route. The advanced guideway system would require new tunnel bores at both the Eisenhower-Johnson Memorial Tunnels and the Twin Tunnels. The six-lane highway widening improvements included with the preferred alternative maximum program have both 55 miles per hour (mph) and 65 mph design options. The 55 mph option would use the existing I-70 alignment. The 65 mph design would require additional tunnels at Dowd Canyon, Hidden Valley, and Floyd Hill. At Dowd Canyon, two tunnels would be required for eastbound and westbound traffic. The preferred alternative identifies a minimum and maximum range of multi-modal improvements ranging in cost from $16.1 billion to $20.2 billion estimated in year of expenditure dollars and assuming the mid year of construction for the whole alternative is 2025. The 21 action alternatives evaluated in this document range in cost from $1.9 billion to $20.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would increase capacity, improve accessibility and mobility, and decrease congestion for travel demand to destinations along the I-70 Mountain Corridor as well as for interstate travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Automobile and truck traffic would continue to degrade air quality, displace key wildlife habitat, and impede and endanger wildlife movements. Contamination from vehicles which then is washed into nearby streams would impact water quality. Under the preferred alternative, the increase in runoff would range from 16 percent to 24 percent. Removal, modification or disturbance of habitat for aquatic species would occur. Historic resources that could be affected include several nationally significant properties, including the Georgetown-Silver Plume National Historic Landmark District and as many as 75 different historic properties. Geologic hazards would need careful examination during Tier 2 processes to locate and design improvements to minimize effects. The preferred alternative would affect between 65 and 90 recreation sites. Transportation energy consumption would increase significantly, particularly under modal options involving highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the original and revised draft EISs, see 05-0396D, Volume 29, Number 3 and 10-0498D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110073, Final EIS--527 pages, Appendices--855 pages, Technical Reports--6 volumes, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 39 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Biologic Surveys KW - Cost Assessments KW - Energy Consumption KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Indian Reservations KW - Paleontological Sites KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130757?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 38 of 39] T2 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873130752; 14829-3_0038 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements along the 144-mile-long Interstate 70 (I-70) Mountain Corridor between Glenwood Springs and State Route 470 (C-470), Garfield, Eagle, Summit, Clear Creek and Jefferson counties, Colorado are proposed. The I-70 highway is the only east-west interstate to cross Colorado, directly serves more than 20 communities and a number of major ski resorts, provides access to the White River National Forest and the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests, and is an important freight corridor. Population growth in the Corridor and in the Denver metropolitan area has increased traffic volumes and recreational travelers currently experience substantial delays on weekends and holidays on the eastern side of the corridor while the western side experiences work trip delays during the week. This project began in 2000 and a revised programmatic draft EIS was issued in 2004. Twenty-one action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this first tier programmatic final EIS. The preferred alternative consists of near-term and general long-term improvements for the Corridor to meet the travel demand for 2050 and address immediate Corridor needs. To address future uncertainties, trigger points and stakeholder involvement would be used to reassess needs and to determine the most appropriate transportation improvements to meet future demand. The preferred alternative would implement a multimodal solution and include non-infrastructure related components, an advanced guideway system, and highway improvements. A specific advanced guideway system technology would be determined in subsequent study or a Tier 2 process and would be deployed to provide transit service from the Eagle County Regional Airport to C-470, a distance of 118 miles. It would be a fully elevated transit system on two tracks aligned to the north, south, or in the median of I-70. The system would connect to the regional transportation district network in Jefferson County and local and regional transit services at most of the 15 proposed transit stations along the route. The advanced guideway system would require new tunnel bores at both the Eisenhower-Johnson Memorial Tunnels and the Twin Tunnels. The six-lane highway widening improvements included with the preferred alternative maximum program have both 55 miles per hour (mph) and 65 mph design options. The 55 mph option would use the existing I-70 alignment. The 65 mph design would require additional tunnels at Dowd Canyon, Hidden Valley, and Floyd Hill. At Dowd Canyon, two tunnels would be required for eastbound and westbound traffic. The preferred alternative identifies a minimum and maximum range of multi-modal improvements ranging in cost from $16.1 billion to $20.2 billion estimated in year of expenditure dollars and assuming the mid year of construction for the whole alternative is 2025. The 21 action alternatives evaluated in this document range in cost from $1.9 billion to $20.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would increase capacity, improve accessibility and mobility, and decrease congestion for travel demand to destinations along the I-70 Mountain Corridor as well as for interstate travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Automobile and truck traffic would continue to degrade air quality, displace key wildlife habitat, and impede and endanger wildlife movements. Contamination from vehicles which then is washed into nearby streams would impact water quality. Under the preferred alternative, the increase in runoff would range from 16 percent to 24 percent. Removal, modification or disturbance of habitat for aquatic species would occur. Historic resources that could be affected include several nationally significant properties, including the Georgetown-Silver Plume National Historic Landmark District and as many as 75 different historic properties. Geologic hazards would need careful examination during Tier 2 processes to locate and design improvements to minimize effects. The preferred alternative would affect between 65 and 90 recreation sites. Transportation energy consumption would increase significantly, particularly under modal options involving highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the original and revised draft EISs, see 05-0396D, Volume 29, Number 3 and 10-0498D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110073, Final EIS--527 pages, Appendices--855 pages, Technical Reports--6 volumes, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 38 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Biologic Surveys KW - Cost Assessments KW - Energy Consumption KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Indian Reservations KW - Paleontological Sites KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130752?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 37 of 39] T2 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873130743; 14829-3_0037 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements along the 144-mile-long Interstate 70 (I-70) Mountain Corridor between Glenwood Springs and State Route 470 (C-470), Garfield, Eagle, Summit, Clear Creek and Jefferson counties, Colorado are proposed. The I-70 highway is the only east-west interstate to cross Colorado, directly serves more than 20 communities and a number of major ski resorts, provides access to the White River National Forest and the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests, and is an important freight corridor. Population growth in the Corridor and in the Denver metropolitan area has increased traffic volumes and recreational travelers currently experience substantial delays on weekends and holidays on the eastern side of the corridor while the western side experiences work trip delays during the week. This project began in 2000 and a revised programmatic draft EIS was issued in 2004. Twenty-one action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this first tier programmatic final EIS. The preferred alternative consists of near-term and general long-term improvements for the Corridor to meet the travel demand for 2050 and address immediate Corridor needs. To address future uncertainties, trigger points and stakeholder involvement would be used to reassess needs and to determine the most appropriate transportation improvements to meet future demand. The preferred alternative would implement a multimodal solution and include non-infrastructure related components, an advanced guideway system, and highway improvements. A specific advanced guideway system technology would be determined in subsequent study or a Tier 2 process and would be deployed to provide transit service from the Eagle County Regional Airport to C-470, a distance of 118 miles. It would be a fully elevated transit system on two tracks aligned to the north, south, or in the median of I-70. The system would connect to the regional transportation district network in Jefferson County and local and regional transit services at most of the 15 proposed transit stations along the route. The advanced guideway system would require new tunnel bores at both the Eisenhower-Johnson Memorial Tunnels and the Twin Tunnels. The six-lane highway widening improvements included with the preferred alternative maximum program have both 55 miles per hour (mph) and 65 mph design options. The 55 mph option would use the existing I-70 alignment. The 65 mph design would require additional tunnels at Dowd Canyon, Hidden Valley, and Floyd Hill. At Dowd Canyon, two tunnels would be required for eastbound and westbound traffic. The preferred alternative identifies a minimum and maximum range of multi-modal improvements ranging in cost from $16.1 billion to $20.2 billion estimated in year of expenditure dollars and assuming the mid year of construction for the whole alternative is 2025. The 21 action alternatives evaluated in this document range in cost from $1.9 billion to $20.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would increase capacity, improve accessibility and mobility, and decrease congestion for travel demand to destinations along the I-70 Mountain Corridor as well as for interstate travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Automobile and truck traffic would continue to degrade air quality, displace key wildlife habitat, and impede and endanger wildlife movements. Contamination from vehicles which then is washed into nearby streams would impact water quality. Under the preferred alternative, the increase in runoff would range from 16 percent to 24 percent. Removal, modification or disturbance of habitat for aquatic species would occur. Historic resources that could be affected include several nationally significant properties, including the Georgetown-Silver Plume National Historic Landmark District and as many as 75 different historic properties. Geologic hazards would need careful examination during Tier 2 processes to locate and design improvements to minimize effects. The preferred alternative would affect between 65 and 90 recreation sites. Transportation energy consumption would increase significantly, particularly under modal options involving highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the original and revised draft EISs, see 05-0396D, Volume 29, Number 3 and 10-0498D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110073, Final EIS--527 pages, Appendices--855 pages, Technical Reports--6 volumes, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 37 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Biologic Surveys KW - Cost Assessments KW - Energy Consumption KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Indian Reservations KW - Paleontological Sites KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130743?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 36 of 39] T2 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873130738; 14829-3_0036 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements along the 144-mile-long Interstate 70 (I-70) Mountain Corridor between Glenwood Springs and State Route 470 (C-470), Garfield, Eagle, Summit, Clear Creek and Jefferson counties, Colorado are proposed. The I-70 highway is the only east-west interstate to cross Colorado, directly serves more than 20 communities and a number of major ski resorts, provides access to the White River National Forest and the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests, and is an important freight corridor. Population growth in the Corridor and in the Denver metropolitan area has increased traffic volumes and recreational travelers currently experience substantial delays on weekends and holidays on the eastern side of the corridor while the western side experiences work trip delays during the week. This project began in 2000 and a revised programmatic draft EIS was issued in 2004. Twenty-one action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this first tier programmatic final EIS. The preferred alternative consists of near-term and general long-term improvements for the Corridor to meet the travel demand for 2050 and address immediate Corridor needs. To address future uncertainties, trigger points and stakeholder involvement would be used to reassess needs and to determine the most appropriate transportation improvements to meet future demand. The preferred alternative would implement a multimodal solution and include non-infrastructure related components, an advanced guideway system, and highway improvements. A specific advanced guideway system technology would be determined in subsequent study or a Tier 2 process and would be deployed to provide transit service from the Eagle County Regional Airport to C-470, a distance of 118 miles. It would be a fully elevated transit system on two tracks aligned to the north, south, or in the median of I-70. The system would connect to the regional transportation district network in Jefferson County and local and regional transit services at most of the 15 proposed transit stations along the route. The advanced guideway system would require new tunnel bores at both the Eisenhower-Johnson Memorial Tunnels and the Twin Tunnels. The six-lane highway widening improvements included with the preferred alternative maximum program have both 55 miles per hour (mph) and 65 mph design options. The 55 mph option would use the existing I-70 alignment. The 65 mph design would require additional tunnels at Dowd Canyon, Hidden Valley, and Floyd Hill. At Dowd Canyon, two tunnels would be required for eastbound and westbound traffic. The preferred alternative identifies a minimum and maximum range of multi-modal improvements ranging in cost from $16.1 billion to $20.2 billion estimated in year of expenditure dollars and assuming the mid year of construction for the whole alternative is 2025. The 21 action alternatives evaluated in this document range in cost from $1.9 billion to $20.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would increase capacity, improve accessibility and mobility, and decrease congestion for travel demand to destinations along the I-70 Mountain Corridor as well as for interstate travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Automobile and truck traffic would continue to degrade air quality, displace key wildlife habitat, and impede and endanger wildlife movements. Contamination from vehicles which then is washed into nearby streams would impact water quality. Under the preferred alternative, the increase in runoff would range from 16 percent to 24 percent. Removal, modification or disturbance of habitat for aquatic species would occur. Historic resources that could be affected include several nationally significant properties, including the Georgetown-Silver Plume National Historic Landmark District and as many as 75 different historic properties. Geologic hazards would need careful examination during Tier 2 processes to locate and design improvements to minimize effects. The preferred alternative would affect between 65 and 90 recreation sites. Transportation energy consumption would increase significantly, particularly under modal options involving highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the original and revised draft EISs, see 05-0396D, Volume 29, Number 3 and 10-0498D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110073, Final EIS--527 pages, Appendices--855 pages, Technical Reports--6 volumes, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 36 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Biologic Surveys KW - Cost Assessments KW - Energy Consumption KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Indian Reservations KW - Paleontological Sites KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130738?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 35 of 39] T2 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873130728; 14829-3_0035 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements along the 144-mile-long Interstate 70 (I-70) Mountain Corridor between Glenwood Springs and State Route 470 (C-470), Garfield, Eagle, Summit, Clear Creek and Jefferson counties, Colorado are proposed. The I-70 highway is the only east-west interstate to cross Colorado, directly serves more than 20 communities and a number of major ski resorts, provides access to the White River National Forest and the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests, and is an important freight corridor. Population growth in the Corridor and in the Denver metropolitan area has increased traffic volumes and recreational travelers currently experience substantial delays on weekends and holidays on the eastern side of the corridor while the western side experiences work trip delays during the week. This project began in 2000 and a revised programmatic draft EIS was issued in 2004. Twenty-one action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this first tier programmatic final EIS. The preferred alternative consists of near-term and general long-term improvements for the Corridor to meet the travel demand for 2050 and address immediate Corridor needs. To address future uncertainties, trigger points and stakeholder involvement would be used to reassess needs and to determine the most appropriate transportation improvements to meet future demand. The preferred alternative would implement a multimodal solution and include non-infrastructure related components, an advanced guideway system, and highway improvements. A specific advanced guideway system technology would be determined in subsequent study or a Tier 2 process and would be deployed to provide transit service from the Eagle County Regional Airport to C-470, a distance of 118 miles. It would be a fully elevated transit system on two tracks aligned to the north, south, or in the median of I-70. The system would connect to the regional transportation district network in Jefferson County and local and regional transit services at most of the 15 proposed transit stations along the route. The advanced guideway system would require new tunnel bores at both the Eisenhower-Johnson Memorial Tunnels and the Twin Tunnels. The six-lane highway widening improvements included with the preferred alternative maximum program have both 55 miles per hour (mph) and 65 mph design options. The 55 mph option would use the existing I-70 alignment. The 65 mph design would require additional tunnels at Dowd Canyon, Hidden Valley, and Floyd Hill. At Dowd Canyon, two tunnels would be required for eastbound and westbound traffic. The preferred alternative identifies a minimum and maximum range of multi-modal improvements ranging in cost from $16.1 billion to $20.2 billion estimated in year of expenditure dollars and assuming the mid year of construction for the whole alternative is 2025. The 21 action alternatives evaluated in this document range in cost from $1.9 billion to $20.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would increase capacity, improve accessibility and mobility, and decrease congestion for travel demand to destinations along the I-70 Mountain Corridor as well as for interstate travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Automobile and truck traffic would continue to degrade air quality, displace key wildlife habitat, and impede and endanger wildlife movements. Contamination from vehicles which then is washed into nearby streams would impact water quality. Under the preferred alternative, the increase in runoff would range from 16 percent to 24 percent. Removal, modification or disturbance of habitat for aquatic species would occur. Historic resources that could be affected include several nationally significant properties, including the Georgetown-Silver Plume National Historic Landmark District and as many as 75 different historic properties. Geologic hazards would need careful examination during Tier 2 processes to locate and design improvements to minimize effects. The preferred alternative would affect between 65 and 90 recreation sites. Transportation energy consumption would increase significantly, particularly under modal options involving highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the original and revised draft EISs, see 05-0396D, Volume 29, Number 3 and 10-0498D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110073, Final EIS--527 pages, Appendices--855 pages, Technical Reports--6 volumes, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 35 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Biologic Surveys KW - Cost Assessments KW - Energy Consumption KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Indian Reservations KW - Paleontological Sites KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130728?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 34 of 39] T2 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873130719; 14829-3_0034 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements along the 144-mile-long Interstate 70 (I-70) Mountain Corridor between Glenwood Springs and State Route 470 (C-470), Garfield, Eagle, Summit, Clear Creek and Jefferson counties, Colorado are proposed. The I-70 highway is the only east-west interstate to cross Colorado, directly serves more than 20 communities and a number of major ski resorts, provides access to the White River National Forest and the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests, and is an important freight corridor. Population growth in the Corridor and in the Denver metropolitan area has increased traffic volumes and recreational travelers currently experience substantial delays on weekends and holidays on the eastern side of the corridor while the western side experiences work trip delays during the week. This project began in 2000 and a revised programmatic draft EIS was issued in 2004. Twenty-one action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this first tier programmatic final EIS. The preferred alternative consists of near-term and general long-term improvements for the Corridor to meet the travel demand for 2050 and address immediate Corridor needs. To address future uncertainties, trigger points and stakeholder involvement would be used to reassess needs and to determine the most appropriate transportation improvements to meet future demand. The preferred alternative would implement a multimodal solution and include non-infrastructure related components, an advanced guideway system, and highway improvements. A specific advanced guideway system technology would be determined in subsequent study or a Tier 2 process and would be deployed to provide transit service from the Eagle County Regional Airport to C-470, a distance of 118 miles. It would be a fully elevated transit system on two tracks aligned to the north, south, or in the median of I-70. The system would connect to the regional transportation district network in Jefferson County and local and regional transit services at most of the 15 proposed transit stations along the route. The advanced guideway system would require new tunnel bores at both the Eisenhower-Johnson Memorial Tunnels and the Twin Tunnels. The six-lane highway widening improvements included with the preferred alternative maximum program have both 55 miles per hour (mph) and 65 mph design options. The 55 mph option would use the existing I-70 alignment. The 65 mph design would require additional tunnels at Dowd Canyon, Hidden Valley, and Floyd Hill. At Dowd Canyon, two tunnels would be required for eastbound and westbound traffic. The preferred alternative identifies a minimum and maximum range of multi-modal improvements ranging in cost from $16.1 billion to $20.2 billion estimated in year of expenditure dollars and assuming the mid year of construction for the whole alternative is 2025. The 21 action alternatives evaluated in this document range in cost from $1.9 billion to $20.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would increase capacity, improve accessibility and mobility, and decrease congestion for travel demand to destinations along the I-70 Mountain Corridor as well as for interstate travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Automobile and truck traffic would continue to degrade air quality, displace key wildlife habitat, and impede and endanger wildlife movements. Contamination from vehicles which then is washed into nearby streams would impact water quality. Under the preferred alternative, the increase in runoff would range from 16 percent to 24 percent. Removal, modification or disturbance of habitat for aquatic species would occur. Historic resources that could be affected include several nationally significant properties, including the Georgetown-Silver Plume National Historic Landmark District and as many as 75 different historic properties. Geologic hazards would need careful examination during Tier 2 processes to locate and design improvements to minimize effects. The preferred alternative would affect between 65 and 90 recreation sites. Transportation energy consumption would increase significantly, particularly under modal options involving highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the original and revised draft EISs, see 05-0396D, Volume 29, Number 3 and 10-0498D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110073, Final EIS--527 pages, Appendices--855 pages, Technical Reports--6 volumes, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 34 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Biologic Surveys KW - Cost Assessments KW - Energy Consumption KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Indian Reservations KW - Paleontological Sites KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130719?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 9 of 39] T2 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873130710; 14829-3_0009 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements along the 144-mile-long Interstate 70 (I-70) Mountain Corridor between Glenwood Springs and State Route 470 (C-470), Garfield, Eagle, Summit, Clear Creek and Jefferson counties, Colorado are proposed. The I-70 highway is the only east-west interstate to cross Colorado, directly serves more than 20 communities and a number of major ski resorts, provides access to the White River National Forest and the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests, and is an important freight corridor. Population growth in the Corridor and in the Denver metropolitan area has increased traffic volumes and recreational travelers currently experience substantial delays on weekends and holidays on the eastern side of the corridor while the western side experiences work trip delays during the week. This project began in 2000 and a revised programmatic draft EIS was issued in 2004. Twenty-one action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this first tier programmatic final EIS. The preferred alternative consists of near-term and general long-term improvements for the Corridor to meet the travel demand for 2050 and address immediate Corridor needs. To address future uncertainties, trigger points and stakeholder involvement would be used to reassess needs and to determine the most appropriate transportation improvements to meet future demand. The preferred alternative would implement a multimodal solution and include non-infrastructure related components, an advanced guideway system, and highway improvements. A specific advanced guideway system technology would be determined in subsequent study or a Tier 2 process and would be deployed to provide transit service from the Eagle County Regional Airport to C-470, a distance of 118 miles. It would be a fully elevated transit system on two tracks aligned to the north, south, or in the median of I-70. The system would connect to the regional transportation district network in Jefferson County and local and regional transit services at most of the 15 proposed transit stations along the route. The advanced guideway system would require new tunnel bores at both the Eisenhower-Johnson Memorial Tunnels and the Twin Tunnels. The six-lane highway widening improvements included with the preferred alternative maximum program have both 55 miles per hour (mph) and 65 mph design options. The 55 mph option would use the existing I-70 alignment. The 65 mph design would require additional tunnels at Dowd Canyon, Hidden Valley, and Floyd Hill. At Dowd Canyon, two tunnels would be required for eastbound and westbound traffic. The preferred alternative identifies a minimum and maximum range of multi-modal improvements ranging in cost from $16.1 billion to $20.2 billion estimated in year of expenditure dollars and assuming the mid year of construction for the whole alternative is 2025. The 21 action alternatives evaluated in this document range in cost from $1.9 billion to $20.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would increase capacity, improve accessibility and mobility, and decrease congestion for travel demand to destinations along the I-70 Mountain Corridor as well as for interstate travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Automobile and truck traffic would continue to degrade air quality, displace key wildlife habitat, and impede and endanger wildlife movements. Contamination from vehicles which then is washed into nearby streams would impact water quality. Under the preferred alternative, the increase in runoff would range from 16 percent to 24 percent. Removal, modification or disturbance of habitat for aquatic species would occur. Historic resources that could be affected include several nationally significant properties, including the Georgetown-Silver Plume National Historic Landmark District and as many as 75 different historic properties. Geologic hazards would need careful examination during Tier 2 processes to locate and design improvements to minimize effects. The preferred alternative would affect between 65 and 90 recreation sites. Transportation energy consumption would increase significantly, particularly under modal options involving highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the original and revised draft EISs, see 05-0396D, Volume 29, Number 3 and 10-0498D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110073, Final EIS--527 pages, Appendices--855 pages, Technical Reports--6 volumes, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Biologic Surveys KW - Cost Assessments KW - Energy Consumption KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Indian Reservations KW - Paleontological Sites KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130710?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 8 of 39] T2 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873130701; 14829-3_0008 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements along the 144-mile-long Interstate 70 (I-70) Mountain Corridor between Glenwood Springs and State Route 470 (C-470), Garfield, Eagle, Summit, Clear Creek and Jefferson counties, Colorado are proposed. The I-70 highway is the only east-west interstate to cross Colorado, directly serves more than 20 communities and a number of major ski resorts, provides access to the White River National Forest and the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests, and is an important freight corridor. Population growth in the Corridor and in the Denver metropolitan area has increased traffic volumes and recreational travelers currently experience substantial delays on weekends and holidays on the eastern side of the corridor while the western side experiences work trip delays during the week. This project began in 2000 and a revised programmatic draft EIS was issued in 2004. Twenty-one action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this first tier programmatic final EIS. The preferred alternative consists of near-term and general long-term improvements for the Corridor to meet the travel demand for 2050 and address immediate Corridor needs. To address future uncertainties, trigger points and stakeholder involvement would be used to reassess needs and to determine the most appropriate transportation improvements to meet future demand. The preferred alternative would implement a multimodal solution and include non-infrastructure related components, an advanced guideway system, and highway improvements. A specific advanced guideway system technology would be determined in subsequent study or a Tier 2 process and would be deployed to provide transit service from the Eagle County Regional Airport to C-470, a distance of 118 miles. It would be a fully elevated transit system on two tracks aligned to the north, south, or in the median of I-70. The system would connect to the regional transportation district network in Jefferson County and local and regional transit services at most of the 15 proposed transit stations along the route. The advanced guideway system would require new tunnel bores at both the Eisenhower-Johnson Memorial Tunnels and the Twin Tunnels. The six-lane highway widening improvements included with the preferred alternative maximum program have both 55 miles per hour (mph) and 65 mph design options. The 55 mph option would use the existing I-70 alignment. The 65 mph design would require additional tunnels at Dowd Canyon, Hidden Valley, and Floyd Hill. At Dowd Canyon, two tunnels would be required for eastbound and westbound traffic. The preferred alternative identifies a minimum and maximum range of multi-modal improvements ranging in cost from $16.1 billion to $20.2 billion estimated in year of expenditure dollars and assuming the mid year of construction for the whole alternative is 2025. The 21 action alternatives evaluated in this document range in cost from $1.9 billion to $20.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would increase capacity, improve accessibility and mobility, and decrease congestion for travel demand to destinations along the I-70 Mountain Corridor as well as for interstate travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Automobile and truck traffic would continue to degrade air quality, displace key wildlife habitat, and impede and endanger wildlife movements. Contamination from vehicles which then is washed into nearby streams would impact water quality. Under the preferred alternative, the increase in runoff would range from 16 percent to 24 percent. Removal, modification or disturbance of habitat for aquatic species would occur. Historic resources that could be affected include several nationally significant properties, including the Georgetown-Silver Plume National Historic Landmark District and as many as 75 different historic properties. Geologic hazards would need careful examination during Tier 2 processes to locate and design improvements to minimize effects. The preferred alternative would affect between 65 and 90 recreation sites. Transportation energy consumption would increase significantly, particularly under modal options involving highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the original and revised draft EISs, see 05-0396D, Volume 29, Number 3 and 10-0498D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110073, Final EIS--527 pages, Appendices--855 pages, Technical Reports--6 volumes, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Biologic Surveys KW - Cost Assessments KW - Energy Consumption KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Indian Reservations KW - Paleontological Sites KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130701?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 4 of 39] T2 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873130653; 14829-3_0004 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements along the 144-mile-long Interstate 70 (I-70) Mountain Corridor between Glenwood Springs and State Route 470 (C-470), Garfield, Eagle, Summit, Clear Creek and Jefferson counties, Colorado are proposed. The I-70 highway is the only east-west interstate to cross Colorado, directly serves more than 20 communities and a number of major ski resorts, provides access to the White River National Forest and the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests, and is an important freight corridor. Population growth in the Corridor and in the Denver metropolitan area has increased traffic volumes and recreational travelers currently experience substantial delays on weekends and holidays on the eastern side of the corridor while the western side experiences work trip delays during the week. This project began in 2000 and a revised programmatic draft EIS was issued in 2004. Twenty-one action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this first tier programmatic final EIS. The preferred alternative consists of near-term and general long-term improvements for the Corridor to meet the travel demand for 2050 and address immediate Corridor needs. To address future uncertainties, trigger points and stakeholder involvement would be used to reassess needs and to determine the most appropriate transportation improvements to meet future demand. The preferred alternative would implement a multimodal solution and include non-infrastructure related components, an advanced guideway system, and highway improvements. A specific advanced guideway system technology would be determined in subsequent study or a Tier 2 process and would be deployed to provide transit service from the Eagle County Regional Airport to C-470, a distance of 118 miles. It would be a fully elevated transit system on two tracks aligned to the north, south, or in the median of I-70. The system would connect to the regional transportation district network in Jefferson County and local and regional transit services at most of the 15 proposed transit stations along the route. The advanced guideway system would require new tunnel bores at both the Eisenhower-Johnson Memorial Tunnels and the Twin Tunnels. The six-lane highway widening improvements included with the preferred alternative maximum program have both 55 miles per hour (mph) and 65 mph design options. The 55 mph option would use the existing I-70 alignment. The 65 mph design would require additional tunnels at Dowd Canyon, Hidden Valley, and Floyd Hill. At Dowd Canyon, two tunnels would be required for eastbound and westbound traffic. The preferred alternative identifies a minimum and maximum range of multi-modal improvements ranging in cost from $16.1 billion to $20.2 billion estimated in year of expenditure dollars and assuming the mid year of construction for the whole alternative is 2025. The 21 action alternatives evaluated in this document range in cost from $1.9 billion to $20.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would increase capacity, improve accessibility and mobility, and decrease congestion for travel demand to destinations along the I-70 Mountain Corridor as well as for interstate travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Automobile and truck traffic would continue to degrade air quality, displace key wildlife habitat, and impede and endanger wildlife movements. Contamination from vehicles which then is washed into nearby streams would impact water quality. Under the preferred alternative, the increase in runoff would range from 16 percent to 24 percent. Removal, modification or disturbance of habitat for aquatic species would occur. Historic resources that could be affected include several nationally significant properties, including the Georgetown-Silver Plume National Historic Landmark District and as many as 75 different historic properties. Geologic hazards would need careful examination during Tier 2 processes to locate and design improvements to minimize effects. The preferred alternative would affect between 65 and 90 recreation sites. Transportation energy consumption would increase significantly, particularly under modal options involving highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the original and revised draft EISs, see 05-0396D, Volume 29, Number 3 and 10-0498D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110073, Final EIS--527 pages, Appendices--855 pages, Technical Reports--6 volumes, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Biologic Surveys KW - Cost Assessments KW - Energy Consumption KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Indian Reservations KW - Paleontological Sites KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130653?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 3 of 39] T2 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873130641; 14829-3_0003 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements along the 144-mile-long Interstate 70 (I-70) Mountain Corridor between Glenwood Springs and State Route 470 (C-470), Garfield, Eagle, Summit, Clear Creek and Jefferson counties, Colorado are proposed. The I-70 highway is the only east-west interstate to cross Colorado, directly serves more than 20 communities and a number of major ski resorts, provides access to the White River National Forest and the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests, and is an important freight corridor. Population growth in the Corridor and in the Denver metropolitan area has increased traffic volumes and recreational travelers currently experience substantial delays on weekends and holidays on the eastern side of the corridor while the western side experiences work trip delays during the week. This project began in 2000 and a revised programmatic draft EIS was issued in 2004. Twenty-one action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this first tier programmatic final EIS. The preferred alternative consists of near-term and general long-term improvements for the Corridor to meet the travel demand for 2050 and address immediate Corridor needs. To address future uncertainties, trigger points and stakeholder involvement would be used to reassess needs and to determine the most appropriate transportation improvements to meet future demand. The preferred alternative would implement a multimodal solution and include non-infrastructure related components, an advanced guideway system, and highway improvements. A specific advanced guideway system technology would be determined in subsequent study or a Tier 2 process and would be deployed to provide transit service from the Eagle County Regional Airport to C-470, a distance of 118 miles. It would be a fully elevated transit system on two tracks aligned to the north, south, or in the median of I-70. The system would connect to the regional transportation district network in Jefferson County and local and regional transit services at most of the 15 proposed transit stations along the route. The advanced guideway system would require new tunnel bores at both the Eisenhower-Johnson Memorial Tunnels and the Twin Tunnels. The six-lane highway widening improvements included with the preferred alternative maximum program have both 55 miles per hour (mph) and 65 mph design options. The 55 mph option would use the existing I-70 alignment. The 65 mph design would require additional tunnels at Dowd Canyon, Hidden Valley, and Floyd Hill. At Dowd Canyon, two tunnels would be required for eastbound and westbound traffic. The preferred alternative identifies a minimum and maximum range of multi-modal improvements ranging in cost from $16.1 billion to $20.2 billion estimated in year of expenditure dollars and assuming the mid year of construction for the whole alternative is 2025. The 21 action alternatives evaluated in this document range in cost from $1.9 billion to $20.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would increase capacity, improve accessibility and mobility, and decrease congestion for travel demand to destinations along the I-70 Mountain Corridor as well as for interstate travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Automobile and truck traffic would continue to degrade air quality, displace key wildlife habitat, and impede and endanger wildlife movements. Contamination from vehicles which then is washed into nearby streams would impact water quality. Under the preferred alternative, the increase in runoff would range from 16 percent to 24 percent. Removal, modification or disturbance of habitat for aquatic species would occur. Historic resources that could be affected include several nationally significant properties, including the Georgetown-Silver Plume National Historic Landmark District and as many as 75 different historic properties. Geologic hazards would need careful examination during Tier 2 processes to locate and design improvements to minimize effects. The preferred alternative would affect between 65 and 90 recreation sites. Transportation energy consumption would increase significantly, particularly under modal options involving highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the original and revised draft EISs, see 05-0396D, Volume 29, Number 3 and 10-0498D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110073, Final EIS--527 pages, Appendices--855 pages, Technical Reports--6 volumes, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Biologic Surveys KW - Cost Assessments KW - Energy Consumption KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Indian Reservations KW - Paleontological Sites KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130641?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116) (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF JULY 2010). [Part 17 of 18] T2 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116) (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF JULY 2010). AN - 873129244; 14828-2_0017 AB - PURPOSE: The construction, operation, and reactivation of 20 miles of rail line in Clearfield and Centre counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. On May 20, 2008, R.J. Corman Railroad Company/Pennsylvania Lines Inc. (RJCP) filed a petition for an exemption from the prior approval requirements to construct and operate an abandoned 10.8-mile rail line between Wallaceton and Winburne in Clearfield County (the Western Segment) and to reactivate a connecting 9.3-mile portion of currently rail banked line between Winburne and Gorton in Clearfield and Centre Counties (the Eastern Segment). The proposed rail line would serve a new waste-to-ethanol facility, quarry, landfill, and industrial park currently being developed by Resource Recovery, LLC (RRLLC), near Gorton, Pennsylvania, as well as several other interested shippers. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to the proposed landfill, quarry, and industrial park development, and the planned transport of municipal solid waste by RJCP. Concerns include the potential for odors, vermin/vectors for disease, containment during transport, leakage during transport, environmental damage associated with a potential derailment, and quality of life issues for adjacent property owners. In addition to the proposed action, the draft EIS of July 2010 evaluated a No Action Alternative, a modified proposed action that would use an alternate route for a portion of the Western Segment, and a No-Build Alternative that would involve a local road system upgrade. The modified proposed action would entail continued use of RJCPs existing Wallaceton Subdivision line south of Wallaceton to a point near Philipsburg where a new connection would be built to another 5.8-mile abandoned rail line leading northeast to Munson (formerly referred to as the Philipsburg Industrial Track). Under either of the build alternatives, RJCP proposes to construct a single-track line on a 66-foot right-of-way over the 20-mile project length and to operate common carrier service over the line. At peak capacity, RJCP anticipates that it would serve the RRLLC development and other local shippers with one or at most two unit trains daily. The local road system upgrade alternative would involve improving the existing local road system to accommodate the anticipated volume of truck traffic generated by RRLLCs proposed development and interested shippers who would use the proposed rail line if it were available. This draft supplemental EIS addresses: 1) the potential impacts associated with RJCPs proposed transport of ethanol, a regulated hazardous material, over the rail line; 2) the change in the preliminary plan approval status of the No-Build Alternative (Black Rock Road upgrade); and 3) the results of the 2010 summer field survey for branching bur-reed. The modified proposed action is the environmentally preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide rail transportation service to RRLLC and several other shippers. The proposed rail line could keep up to 1,100 trucks per day off the local road system. The 25-mile-per-hour maximum operation speed would reduce the already extremely low probability of occurrence for a train accident resulting in release of ethanol. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Reactivation of the rail banked Eastern Segment would result in the loss of 9.3 miles of the Snow Shoe Multi-Use Rail Trail. Implementation of the modified proposed action would impact 3.4 acres of wetlands, cross five public roads and two private driveways, and create noise impacts to 32 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: National Trails System Act of 1968. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0482D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110072, 195 pages, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 17 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Health Hazards KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Roads KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Waste Management KW - Wetlands KW - Pennsylvania KW - National Trails System Act of 1968, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129244?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%29+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+JULY+2010%29.&rft.title=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%29+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+JULY+2010%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116) (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF JULY 2010). [Part 16 of 18] T2 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116) (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF JULY 2010). AN - 873129226; 14828-2_0016 AB - PURPOSE: The construction, operation, and reactivation of 20 miles of rail line in Clearfield and Centre counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. On May 20, 2008, R.J. Corman Railroad Company/Pennsylvania Lines Inc. (RJCP) filed a petition for an exemption from the prior approval requirements to construct and operate an abandoned 10.8-mile rail line between Wallaceton and Winburne in Clearfield County (the Western Segment) and to reactivate a connecting 9.3-mile portion of currently rail banked line between Winburne and Gorton in Clearfield and Centre Counties (the Eastern Segment). The proposed rail line would serve a new waste-to-ethanol facility, quarry, landfill, and industrial park currently being developed by Resource Recovery, LLC (RRLLC), near Gorton, Pennsylvania, as well as several other interested shippers. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to the proposed landfill, quarry, and industrial park development, and the planned transport of municipal solid waste by RJCP. Concerns include the potential for odors, vermin/vectors for disease, containment during transport, leakage during transport, environmental damage associated with a potential derailment, and quality of life issues for adjacent property owners. In addition to the proposed action, the draft EIS of July 2010 evaluated a No Action Alternative, a modified proposed action that would use an alternate route for a portion of the Western Segment, and a No-Build Alternative that would involve a local road system upgrade. The modified proposed action would entail continued use of RJCPs existing Wallaceton Subdivision line south of Wallaceton to a point near Philipsburg where a new connection would be built to another 5.8-mile abandoned rail line leading northeast to Munson (formerly referred to as the Philipsburg Industrial Track). Under either of the build alternatives, RJCP proposes to construct a single-track line on a 66-foot right-of-way over the 20-mile project length and to operate common carrier service over the line. At peak capacity, RJCP anticipates that it would serve the RRLLC development and other local shippers with one or at most two unit trains daily. The local road system upgrade alternative would involve improving the existing local road system to accommodate the anticipated volume of truck traffic generated by RRLLCs proposed development and interested shippers who would use the proposed rail line if it were available. This draft supplemental EIS addresses: 1) the potential impacts associated with RJCPs proposed transport of ethanol, a regulated hazardous material, over the rail line; 2) the change in the preliminary plan approval status of the No-Build Alternative (Black Rock Road upgrade); and 3) the results of the 2010 summer field survey for branching bur-reed. The modified proposed action is the environmentally preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide rail transportation service to RRLLC and several other shippers. The proposed rail line could keep up to 1,100 trucks per day off the local road system. The 25-mile-per-hour maximum operation speed would reduce the already extremely low probability of occurrence for a train accident resulting in release of ethanol. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Reactivation of the rail banked Eastern Segment would result in the loss of 9.3 miles of the Snow Shoe Multi-Use Rail Trail. Implementation of the modified proposed action would impact 3.4 acres of wetlands, cross five public roads and two private driveways, and create noise impacts to 32 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: National Trails System Act of 1968. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0482D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110072, 195 pages, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 16 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Health Hazards KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Roads KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Waste Management KW - Wetlands KW - Pennsylvania KW - National Trails System Act of 1968, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129226?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%29+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+JULY+2010%29.&rft.title=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%29+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+JULY+2010%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116) (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF JULY 2010). [Part 15 of 18] T2 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116) (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF JULY 2010). AN - 873129210; 14828-2_0015 AB - PURPOSE: The construction, operation, and reactivation of 20 miles of rail line in Clearfield and Centre counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. On May 20, 2008, R.J. Corman Railroad Company/Pennsylvania Lines Inc. (RJCP) filed a petition for an exemption from the prior approval requirements to construct and operate an abandoned 10.8-mile rail line between Wallaceton and Winburne in Clearfield County (the Western Segment) and to reactivate a connecting 9.3-mile portion of currently rail banked line between Winburne and Gorton in Clearfield and Centre Counties (the Eastern Segment). The proposed rail line would serve a new waste-to-ethanol facility, quarry, landfill, and industrial park currently being developed by Resource Recovery, LLC (RRLLC), near Gorton, Pennsylvania, as well as several other interested shippers. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to the proposed landfill, quarry, and industrial park development, and the planned transport of municipal solid waste by RJCP. Concerns include the potential for odors, vermin/vectors for disease, containment during transport, leakage during transport, environmental damage associated with a potential derailment, and quality of life issues for adjacent property owners. In addition to the proposed action, the draft EIS of July 2010 evaluated a No Action Alternative, a modified proposed action that would use an alternate route for a portion of the Western Segment, and a No-Build Alternative that would involve a local road system upgrade. The modified proposed action would entail continued use of RJCPs existing Wallaceton Subdivision line south of Wallaceton to a point near Philipsburg where a new connection would be built to another 5.8-mile abandoned rail line leading northeast to Munson (formerly referred to as the Philipsburg Industrial Track). Under either of the build alternatives, RJCP proposes to construct a single-track line on a 66-foot right-of-way over the 20-mile project length and to operate common carrier service over the line. At peak capacity, RJCP anticipates that it would serve the RRLLC development and other local shippers with one or at most two unit trains daily. The local road system upgrade alternative would involve improving the existing local road system to accommodate the anticipated volume of truck traffic generated by RRLLCs proposed development and interested shippers who would use the proposed rail line if it were available. This draft supplemental EIS addresses: 1) the potential impacts associated with RJCPs proposed transport of ethanol, a regulated hazardous material, over the rail line; 2) the change in the preliminary plan approval status of the No-Build Alternative (Black Rock Road upgrade); and 3) the results of the 2010 summer field survey for branching bur-reed. The modified proposed action is the environmentally preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide rail transportation service to RRLLC and several other shippers. The proposed rail line could keep up to 1,100 trucks per day off the local road system. The 25-mile-per-hour maximum operation speed would reduce the already extremely low probability of occurrence for a train accident resulting in release of ethanol. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Reactivation of the rail banked Eastern Segment would result in the loss of 9.3 miles of the Snow Shoe Multi-Use Rail Trail. Implementation of the modified proposed action would impact 3.4 acres of wetlands, cross five public roads and two private driveways, and create noise impacts to 32 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: National Trails System Act of 1968. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0482D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110072, 195 pages, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Health Hazards KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Roads KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Waste Management KW - Wetlands KW - Pennsylvania KW - National Trails System Act of 1968, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129210?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%29+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+JULY+2010%29.&rft.title=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%29+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+JULY+2010%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116) (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF JULY 2010). [Part 14 of 18] T2 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116) (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF JULY 2010). AN - 873129192; 14828-2_0014 AB - PURPOSE: The construction, operation, and reactivation of 20 miles of rail line in Clearfield and Centre counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. On May 20, 2008, R.J. Corman Railroad Company/Pennsylvania Lines Inc. (RJCP) filed a petition for an exemption from the prior approval requirements to construct and operate an abandoned 10.8-mile rail line between Wallaceton and Winburne in Clearfield County (the Western Segment) and to reactivate a connecting 9.3-mile portion of currently rail banked line between Winburne and Gorton in Clearfield and Centre Counties (the Eastern Segment). The proposed rail line would serve a new waste-to-ethanol facility, quarry, landfill, and industrial park currently being developed by Resource Recovery, LLC (RRLLC), near Gorton, Pennsylvania, as well as several other interested shippers. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to the proposed landfill, quarry, and industrial park development, and the planned transport of municipal solid waste by RJCP. Concerns include the potential for odors, vermin/vectors for disease, containment during transport, leakage during transport, environmental damage associated with a potential derailment, and quality of life issues for adjacent property owners. In addition to the proposed action, the draft EIS of July 2010 evaluated a No Action Alternative, a modified proposed action that would use an alternate route for a portion of the Western Segment, and a No-Build Alternative that would involve a local road system upgrade. The modified proposed action would entail continued use of RJCPs existing Wallaceton Subdivision line south of Wallaceton to a point near Philipsburg where a new connection would be built to another 5.8-mile abandoned rail line leading northeast to Munson (formerly referred to as the Philipsburg Industrial Track). Under either of the build alternatives, RJCP proposes to construct a single-track line on a 66-foot right-of-way over the 20-mile project length and to operate common carrier service over the line. At peak capacity, RJCP anticipates that it would serve the RRLLC development and other local shippers with one or at most two unit trains daily. The local road system upgrade alternative would involve improving the existing local road system to accommodate the anticipated volume of truck traffic generated by RRLLCs proposed development and interested shippers who would use the proposed rail line if it were available. This draft supplemental EIS addresses: 1) the potential impacts associated with RJCPs proposed transport of ethanol, a regulated hazardous material, over the rail line; 2) the change in the preliminary plan approval status of the No-Build Alternative (Black Rock Road upgrade); and 3) the results of the 2010 summer field survey for branching bur-reed. The modified proposed action is the environmentally preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide rail transportation service to RRLLC and several other shippers. The proposed rail line could keep up to 1,100 trucks per day off the local road system. The 25-mile-per-hour maximum operation speed would reduce the already extremely low probability of occurrence for a train accident resulting in release of ethanol. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Reactivation of the rail banked Eastern Segment would result in the loss of 9.3 miles of the Snow Shoe Multi-Use Rail Trail. Implementation of the modified proposed action would impact 3.4 acres of wetlands, cross five public roads and two private driveways, and create noise impacts to 32 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: National Trails System Act of 1968. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0482D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110072, 195 pages, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Health Hazards KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Roads KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Waste Management KW - Wetlands KW - Pennsylvania KW - National Trails System Act of 1968, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129192?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%29+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+JULY+2010%29.&rft.title=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%29+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+JULY+2010%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116) (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF JULY 2010). [Part 9 of 18] T2 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116) (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF JULY 2010). AN - 873129180; 14828-2_0009 AB - PURPOSE: The construction, operation, and reactivation of 20 miles of rail line in Clearfield and Centre counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. On May 20, 2008, R.J. Corman Railroad Company/Pennsylvania Lines Inc. (RJCP) filed a petition for an exemption from the prior approval requirements to construct and operate an abandoned 10.8-mile rail line between Wallaceton and Winburne in Clearfield County (the Western Segment) and to reactivate a connecting 9.3-mile portion of currently rail banked line between Winburne and Gorton in Clearfield and Centre Counties (the Eastern Segment). The proposed rail line would serve a new waste-to-ethanol facility, quarry, landfill, and industrial park currently being developed by Resource Recovery, LLC (RRLLC), near Gorton, Pennsylvania, as well as several other interested shippers. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to the proposed landfill, quarry, and industrial park development, and the planned transport of municipal solid waste by RJCP. Concerns include the potential for odors, vermin/vectors for disease, containment during transport, leakage during transport, environmental damage associated with a potential derailment, and quality of life issues for adjacent property owners. In addition to the proposed action, the draft EIS of July 2010 evaluated a No Action Alternative, a modified proposed action that would use an alternate route for a portion of the Western Segment, and a No-Build Alternative that would involve a local road system upgrade. The modified proposed action would entail continued use of RJCPs existing Wallaceton Subdivision line south of Wallaceton to a point near Philipsburg where a new connection would be built to another 5.8-mile abandoned rail line leading northeast to Munson (formerly referred to as the Philipsburg Industrial Track). Under either of the build alternatives, RJCP proposes to construct a single-track line on a 66-foot right-of-way over the 20-mile project length and to operate common carrier service over the line. At peak capacity, RJCP anticipates that it would serve the RRLLC development and other local shippers with one or at most two unit trains daily. The local road system upgrade alternative would involve improving the existing local road system to accommodate the anticipated volume of truck traffic generated by RRLLCs proposed development and interested shippers who would use the proposed rail line if it were available. This draft supplemental EIS addresses: 1) the potential impacts associated with RJCPs proposed transport of ethanol, a regulated hazardous material, over the rail line; 2) the change in the preliminary plan approval status of the No-Build Alternative (Black Rock Road upgrade); and 3) the results of the 2010 summer field survey for branching bur-reed. The modified proposed action is the environmentally preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide rail transportation service to RRLLC and several other shippers. The proposed rail line could keep up to 1,100 trucks per day off the local road system. The 25-mile-per-hour maximum operation speed would reduce the already extremely low probability of occurrence for a train accident resulting in release of ethanol. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Reactivation of the rail banked Eastern Segment would result in the loss of 9.3 miles of the Snow Shoe Multi-Use Rail Trail. Implementation of the modified proposed action would impact 3.4 acres of wetlands, cross five public roads and two private driveways, and create noise impacts to 32 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: National Trails System Act of 1968. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0482D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110072, 195 pages, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Health Hazards KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Roads KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Waste Management KW - Wetlands KW - Pennsylvania KW - National Trails System Act of 1968, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129180?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%29+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+JULY+2010%29.&rft.title=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%29+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+JULY+2010%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116) (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF JULY 2010). [Part 8 of 18] T2 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116) (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF JULY 2010). AN - 873129167; 14828-2_0008 AB - PURPOSE: The construction, operation, and reactivation of 20 miles of rail line in Clearfield and Centre counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. On May 20, 2008, R.J. Corman Railroad Company/Pennsylvania Lines Inc. (RJCP) filed a petition for an exemption from the prior approval requirements to construct and operate an abandoned 10.8-mile rail line between Wallaceton and Winburne in Clearfield County (the Western Segment) and to reactivate a connecting 9.3-mile portion of currently rail banked line between Winburne and Gorton in Clearfield and Centre Counties (the Eastern Segment). The proposed rail line would serve a new waste-to-ethanol facility, quarry, landfill, and industrial park currently being developed by Resource Recovery, LLC (RRLLC), near Gorton, Pennsylvania, as well as several other interested shippers. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to the proposed landfill, quarry, and industrial park development, and the planned transport of municipal solid waste by RJCP. Concerns include the potential for odors, vermin/vectors for disease, containment during transport, leakage during transport, environmental damage associated with a potential derailment, and quality of life issues for adjacent property owners. In addition to the proposed action, the draft EIS of July 2010 evaluated a No Action Alternative, a modified proposed action that would use an alternate route for a portion of the Western Segment, and a No-Build Alternative that would involve a local road system upgrade. The modified proposed action would entail continued use of RJCPs existing Wallaceton Subdivision line south of Wallaceton to a point near Philipsburg where a new connection would be built to another 5.8-mile abandoned rail line leading northeast to Munson (formerly referred to as the Philipsburg Industrial Track). Under either of the build alternatives, RJCP proposes to construct a single-track line on a 66-foot right-of-way over the 20-mile project length and to operate common carrier service over the line. At peak capacity, RJCP anticipates that it would serve the RRLLC development and other local shippers with one or at most two unit trains daily. The local road system upgrade alternative would involve improving the existing local road system to accommodate the anticipated volume of truck traffic generated by RRLLCs proposed development and interested shippers who would use the proposed rail line if it were available. This draft supplemental EIS addresses: 1) the potential impacts associated with RJCPs proposed transport of ethanol, a regulated hazardous material, over the rail line; 2) the change in the preliminary plan approval status of the No-Build Alternative (Black Rock Road upgrade); and 3) the results of the 2010 summer field survey for branching bur-reed. The modified proposed action is the environmentally preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide rail transportation service to RRLLC and several other shippers. The proposed rail line could keep up to 1,100 trucks per day off the local road system. The 25-mile-per-hour maximum operation speed would reduce the already extremely low probability of occurrence for a train accident resulting in release of ethanol. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Reactivation of the rail banked Eastern Segment would result in the loss of 9.3 miles of the Snow Shoe Multi-Use Rail Trail. Implementation of the modified proposed action would impact 3.4 acres of wetlands, cross five public roads and two private driveways, and create noise impacts to 32 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: National Trails System Act of 1968. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0482D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110072, 195 pages, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Health Hazards KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Roads KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Waste Management KW - Wetlands KW - Pennsylvania KW - National Trails System Act of 1968, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129167?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%29+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+JULY+2010%29.&rft.title=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%29+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+JULY+2010%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 15 of 39] T2 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873128826; 14829-3_0015 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements along the 144-mile-long Interstate 70 (I-70) Mountain Corridor between Glenwood Springs and State Route 470 (C-470), Garfield, Eagle, Summit, Clear Creek and Jefferson counties, Colorado are proposed. The I-70 highway is the only east-west interstate to cross Colorado, directly serves more than 20 communities and a number of major ski resorts, provides access to the White River National Forest and the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests, and is an important freight corridor. Population growth in the Corridor and in the Denver metropolitan area has increased traffic volumes and recreational travelers currently experience substantial delays on weekends and holidays on the eastern side of the corridor while the western side experiences work trip delays during the week. This project began in 2000 and a revised programmatic draft EIS was issued in 2004. Twenty-one action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this first tier programmatic final EIS. The preferred alternative consists of near-term and general long-term improvements for the Corridor to meet the travel demand for 2050 and address immediate Corridor needs. To address future uncertainties, trigger points and stakeholder involvement would be used to reassess needs and to determine the most appropriate transportation improvements to meet future demand. The preferred alternative would implement a multimodal solution and include non-infrastructure related components, an advanced guideway system, and highway improvements. A specific advanced guideway system technology would be determined in subsequent study or a Tier 2 process and would be deployed to provide transit service from the Eagle County Regional Airport to C-470, a distance of 118 miles. It would be a fully elevated transit system on two tracks aligned to the north, south, or in the median of I-70. The system would connect to the regional transportation district network in Jefferson County and local and regional transit services at most of the 15 proposed transit stations along the route. The advanced guideway system would require new tunnel bores at both the Eisenhower-Johnson Memorial Tunnels and the Twin Tunnels. The six-lane highway widening improvements included with the preferred alternative maximum program have both 55 miles per hour (mph) and 65 mph design options. The 55 mph option would use the existing I-70 alignment. The 65 mph design would require additional tunnels at Dowd Canyon, Hidden Valley, and Floyd Hill. At Dowd Canyon, two tunnels would be required for eastbound and westbound traffic. The preferred alternative identifies a minimum and maximum range of multi-modal improvements ranging in cost from $16.1 billion to $20.2 billion estimated in year of expenditure dollars and assuming the mid year of construction for the whole alternative is 2025. The 21 action alternatives evaluated in this document range in cost from $1.9 billion to $20.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would increase capacity, improve accessibility and mobility, and decrease congestion for travel demand to destinations along the I-70 Mountain Corridor as well as for interstate travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Automobile and truck traffic would continue to degrade air quality, displace key wildlife habitat, and impede and endanger wildlife movements. Contamination from vehicles which then is washed into nearby streams would impact water quality. Under the preferred alternative, the increase in runoff would range from 16 percent to 24 percent. Removal, modification or disturbance of habitat for aquatic species would occur. Historic resources that could be affected include several nationally significant properties, including the Georgetown-Silver Plume National Historic Landmark District and as many as 75 different historic properties. Geologic hazards would need careful examination during Tier 2 processes to locate and design improvements to minimize effects. The preferred alternative would affect between 65 and 90 recreation sites. Transportation energy consumption would increase significantly, particularly under modal options involving highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the original and revised draft EISs, see 05-0396D, Volume 29, Number 3 and 10-0498D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110073, Final EIS--527 pages, Appendices--855 pages, Technical Reports--6 volumes, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Biologic Surveys KW - Cost Assessments KW - Energy Consumption KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Indian Reservations KW - Paleontological Sites KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128826?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 14 of 39] T2 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873128812; 14829-3_0014 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements along the 144-mile-long Interstate 70 (I-70) Mountain Corridor between Glenwood Springs and State Route 470 (C-470), Garfield, Eagle, Summit, Clear Creek and Jefferson counties, Colorado are proposed. The I-70 highway is the only east-west interstate to cross Colorado, directly serves more than 20 communities and a number of major ski resorts, provides access to the White River National Forest and the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests, and is an important freight corridor. Population growth in the Corridor and in the Denver metropolitan area has increased traffic volumes and recreational travelers currently experience substantial delays on weekends and holidays on the eastern side of the corridor while the western side experiences work trip delays during the week. This project began in 2000 and a revised programmatic draft EIS was issued in 2004. Twenty-one action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this first tier programmatic final EIS. The preferred alternative consists of near-term and general long-term improvements for the Corridor to meet the travel demand for 2050 and address immediate Corridor needs. To address future uncertainties, trigger points and stakeholder involvement would be used to reassess needs and to determine the most appropriate transportation improvements to meet future demand. The preferred alternative would implement a multimodal solution and include non-infrastructure related components, an advanced guideway system, and highway improvements. A specific advanced guideway system technology would be determined in subsequent study or a Tier 2 process and would be deployed to provide transit service from the Eagle County Regional Airport to C-470, a distance of 118 miles. It would be a fully elevated transit system on two tracks aligned to the north, south, or in the median of I-70. The system would connect to the regional transportation district network in Jefferson County and local and regional transit services at most of the 15 proposed transit stations along the route. The advanced guideway system would require new tunnel bores at both the Eisenhower-Johnson Memorial Tunnels and the Twin Tunnels. The six-lane highway widening improvements included with the preferred alternative maximum program have both 55 miles per hour (mph) and 65 mph design options. The 55 mph option would use the existing I-70 alignment. The 65 mph design would require additional tunnels at Dowd Canyon, Hidden Valley, and Floyd Hill. At Dowd Canyon, two tunnels would be required for eastbound and westbound traffic. The preferred alternative identifies a minimum and maximum range of multi-modal improvements ranging in cost from $16.1 billion to $20.2 billion estimated in year of expenditure dollars and assuming the mid year of construction for the whole alternative is 2025. The 21 action alternatives evaluated in this document range in cost from $1.9 billion to $20.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would increase capacity, improve accessibility and mobility, and decrease congestion for travel demand to destinations along the I-70 Mountain Corridor as well as for interstate travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Automobile and truck traffic would continue to degrade air quality, displace key wildlife habitat, and impede and endanger wildlife movements. Contamination from vehicles which then is washed into nearby streams would impact water quality. Under the preferred alternative, the increase in runoff would range from 16 percent to 24 percent. Removal, modification or disturbance of habitat for aquatic species would occur. Historic resources that could be affected include several nationally significant properties, including the Georgetown-Silver Plume National Historic Landmark District and as many as 75 different historic properties. Geologic hazards would need careful examination during Tier 2 processes to locate and design improvements to minimize effects. The preferred alternative would affect between 65 and 90 recreation sites. Transportation energy consumption would increase significantly, particularly under modal options involving highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the original and revised draft EISs, see 05-0396D, Volume 29, Number 3 and 10-0498D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110073, Final EIS--527 pages, Appendices--855 pages, Technical Reports--6 volumes, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Biologic Surveys KW - Cost Assessments KW - Energy Consumption KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Indian Reservations KW - Paleontological Sites KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128812?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 12 of 39] T2 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873128784; 14829-3_0012 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements along the 144-mile-long Interstate 70 (I-70) Mountain Corridor between Glenwood Springs and State Route 470 (C-470), Garfield, Eagle, Summit, Clear Creek and Jefferson counties, Colorado are proposed. The I-70 highway is the only east-west interstate to cross Colorado, directly serves more than 20 communities and a number of major ski resorts, provides access to the White River National Forest and the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests, and is an important freight corridor. Population growth in the Corridor and in the Denver metropolitan area has increased traffic volumes and recreational travelers currently experience substantial delays on weekends and holidays on the eastern side of the corridor while the western side experiences work trip delays during the week. This project began in 2000 and a revised programmatic draft EIS was issued in 2004. Twenty-one action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this first tier programmatic final EIS. The preferred alternative consists of near-term and general long-term improvements for the Corridor to meet the travel demand for 2050 and address immediate Corridor needs. To address future uncertainties, trigger points and stakeholder involvement would be used to reassess needs and to determine the most appropriate transportation improvements to meet future demand. The preferred alternative would implement a multimodal solution and include non-infrastructure related components, an advanced guideway system, and highway improvements. A specific advanced guideway system technology would be determined in subsequent study or a Tier 2 process and would be deployed to provide transit service from the Eagle County Regional Airport to C-470, a distance of 118 miles. It would be a fully elevated transit system on two tracks aligned to the north, south, or in the median of I-70. The system would connect to the regional transportation district network in Jefferson County and local and regional transit services at most of the 15 proposed transit stations along the route. The advanced guideway system would require new tunnel bores at both the Eisenhower-Johnson Memorial Tunnels and the Twin Tunnels. The six-lane highway widening improvements included with the preferred alternative maximum program have both 55 miles per hour (mph) and 65 mph design options. The 55 mph option would use the existing I-70 alignment. The 65 mph design would require additional tunnels at Dowd Canyon, Hidden Valley, and Floyd Hill. At Dowd Canyon, two tunnels would be required for eastbound and westbound traffic. The preferred alternative identifies a minimum and maximum range of multi-modal improvements ranging in cost from $16.1 billion to $20.2 billion estimated in year of expenditure dollars and assuming the mid year of construction for the whole alternative is 2025. The 21 action alternatives evaluated in this document range in cost from $1.9 billion to $20.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would increase capacity, improve accessibility and mobility, and decrease congestion for travel demand to destinations along the I-70 Mountain Corridor as well as for interstate travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Automobile and truck traffic would continue to degrade air quality, displace key wildlife habitat, and impede and endanger wildlife movements. Contamination from vehicles which then is washed into nearby streams would impact water quality. Under the preferred alternative, the increase in runoff would range from 16 percent to 24 percent. Removal, modification or disturbance of habitat for aquatic species would occur. Historic resources that could be affected include several nationally significant properties, including the Georgetown-Silver Plume National Historic Landmark District and as many as 75 different historic properties. Geologic hazards would need careful examination during Tier 2 processes to locate and design improvements to minimize effects. The preferred alternative would affect between 65 and 90 recreation sites. Transportation energy consumption would increase significantly, particularly under modal options involving highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the original and revised draft EISs, see 05-0396D, Volume 29, Number 3 and 10-0498D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110073, Final EIS--527 pages, Appendices--855 pages, Technical Reports--6 volumes, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Biologic Surveys KW - Cost Assessments KW - Energy Consumption KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Indian Reservations KW - Paleontological Sites KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128784?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 11 of 39] T2 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873128776; 14829-3_0011 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements along the 144-mile-long Interstate 70 (I-70) Mountain Corridor between Glenwood Springs and State Route 470 (C-470), Garfield, Eagle, Summit, Clear Creek and Jefferson counties, Colorado are proposed. The I-70 highway is the only east-west interstate to cross Colorado, directly serves more than 20 communities and a number of major ski resorts, provides access to the White River National Forest and the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests, and is an important freight corridor. Population growth in the Corridor and in the Denver metropolitan area has increased traffic volumes and recreational travelers currently experience substantial delays on weekends and holidays on the eastern side of the corridor while the western side experiences work trip delays during the week. This project began in 2000 and a revised programmatic draft EIS was issued in 2004. Twenty-one action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this first tier programmatic final EIS. The preferred alternative consists of near-term and general long-term improvements for the Corridor to meet the travel demand for 2050 and address immediate Corridor needs. To address future uncertainties, trigger points and stakeholder involvement would be used to reassess needs and to determine the most appropriate transportation improvements to meet future demand. The preferred alternative would implement a multimodal solution and include non-infrastructure related components, an advanced guideway system, and highway improvements. A specific advanced guideway system technology would be determined in subsequent study or a Tier 2 process and would be deployed to provide transit service from the Eagle County Regional Airport to C-470, a distance of 118 miles. It would be a fully elevated transit system on two tracks aligned to the north, south, or in the median of I-70. The system would connect to the regional transportation district network in Jefferson County and local and regional transit services at most of the 15 proposed transit stations along the route. The advanced guideway system would require new tunnel bores at both the Eisenhower-Johnson Memorial Tunnels and the Twin Tunnels. The six-lane highway widening improvements included with the preferred alternative maximum program have both 55 miles per hour (mph) and 65 mph design options. The 55 mph option would use the existing I-70 alignment. The 65 mph design would require additional tunnels at Dowd Canyon, Hidden Valley, and Floyd Hill. At Dowd Canyon, two tunnels would be required for eastbound and westbound traffic. The preferred alternative identifies a minimum and maximum range of multi-modal improvements ranging in cost from $16.1 billion to $20.2 billion estimated in year of expenditure dollars and assuming the mid year of construction for the whole alternative is 2025. The 21 action alternatives evaluated in this document range in cost from $1.9 billion to $20.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would increase capacity, improve accessibility and mobility, and decrease congestion for travel demand to destinations along the I-70 Mountain Corridor as well as for interstate travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Automobile and truck traffic would continue to degrade air quality, displace key wildlife habitat, and impede and endanger wildlife movements. Contamination from vehicles which then is washed into nearby streams would impact water quality. Under the preferred alternative, the increase in runoff would range from 16 percent to 24 percent. Removal, modification or disturbance of habitat for aquatic species would occur. Historic resources that could be affected include several nationally significant properties, including the Georgetown-Silver Plume National Historic Landmark District and as many as 75 different historic properties. Geologic hazards would need careful examination during Tier 2 processes to locate and design improvements to minimize effects. The preferred alternative would affect between 65 and 90 recreation sites. Transportation energy consumption would increase significantly, particularly under modal options involving highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the original and revised draft EISs, see 05-0396D, Volume 29, Number 3 and 10-0498D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110073, Final EIS--527 pages, Appendices--855 pages, Technical Reports--6 volumes, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Biologic Surveys KW - Cost Assessments KW - Energy Consumption KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Indian Reservations KW - Paleontological Sites KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128776?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 10 of 39] T2 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873128036; 14829-3_0010 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements along the 144-mile-long Interstate 70 (I-70) Mountain Corridor between Glenwood Springs and State Route 470 (C-470), Garfield, Eagle, Summit, Clear Creek and Jefferson counties, Colorado are proposed. The I-70 highway is the only east-west interstate to cross Colorado, directly serves more than 20 communities and a number of major ski resorts, provides access to the White River National Forest and the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests, and is an important freight corridor. Population growth in the Corridor and in the Denver metropolitan area has increased traffic volumes and recreational travelers currently experience substantial delays on weekends and holidays on the eastern side of the corridor while the western side experiences work trip delays during the week. This project began in 2000 and a revised programmatic draft EIS was issued in 2004. Twenty-one action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this first tier programmatic final EIS. The preferred alternative consists of near-term and general long-term improvements for the Corridor to meet the travel demand for 2050 and address immediate Corridor needs. To address future uncertainties, trigger points and stakeholder involvement would be used to reassess needs and to determine the most appropriate transportation improvements to meet future demand. The preferred alternative would implement a multimodal solution and include non-infrastructure related components, an advanced guideway system, and highway improvements. A specific advanced guideway system technology would be determined in subsequent study or a Tier 2 process and would be deployed to provide transit service from the Eagle County Regional Airport to C-470, a distance of 118 miles. It would be a fully elevated transit system on two tracks aligned to the north, south, or in the median of I-70. The system would connect to the regional transportation district network in Jefferson County and local and regional transit services at most of the 15 proposed transit stations along the route. The advanced guideway system would require new tunnel bores at both the Eisenhower-Johnson Memorial Tunnels and the Twin Tunnels. The six-lane highway widening improvements included with the preferred alternative maximum program have both 55 miles per hour (mph) and 65 mph design options. The 55 mph option would use the existing I-70 alignment. The 65 mph design would require additional tunnels at Dowd Canyon, Hidden Valley, and Floyd Hill. At Dowd Canyon, two tunnels would be required for eastbound and westbound traffic. The preferred alternative identifies a minimum and maximum range of multi-modal improvements ranging in cost from $16.1 billion to $20.2 billion estimated in year of expenditure dollars and assuming the mid year of construction for the whole alternative is 2025. The 21 action alternatives evaluated in this document range in cost from $1.9 billion to $20.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would increase capacity, improve accessibility and mobility, and decrease congestion for travel demand to destinations along the I-70 Mountain Corridor as well as for interstate travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Automobile and truck traffic would continue to degrade air quality, displace key wildlife habitat, and impede and endanger wildlife movements. Contamination from vehicles which then is washed into nearby streams would impact water quality. Under the preferred alternative, the increase in runoff would range from 16 percent to 24 percent. Removal, modification or disturbance of habitat for aquatic species would occur. Historic resources that could be affected include several nationally significant properties, including the Georgetown-Silver Plume National Historic Landmark District and as many as 75 different historic properties. Geologic hazards would need careful examination during Tier 2 processes to locate and design improvements to minimize effects. The preferred alternative would affect between 65 and 90 recreation sites. Transportation energy consumption would increase significantly, particularly under modal options involving highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the original and revised draft EISs, see 05-0396D, Volume 29, Number 3 and 10-0498D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110073, Final EIS--527 pages, Appendices--855 pages, Technical Reports--6 volumes, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Biologic Surveys KW - Cost Assessments KW - Energy Consumption KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Indian Reservations KW - Paleontological Sites KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128036?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 33 of 39] T2 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873127795; 14829-3_0033 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements along the 144-mile-long Interstate 70 (I-70) Mountain Corridor between Glenwood Springs and State Route 470 (C-470), Garfield, Eagle, Summit, Clear Creek and Jefferson counties, Colorado are proposed. The I-70 highway is the only east-west interstate to cross Colorado, directly serves more than 20 communities and a number of major ski resorts, provides access to the White River National Forest and the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests, and is an important freight corridor. Population growth in the Corridor and in the Denver metropolitan area has increased traffic volumes and recreational travelers currently experience substantial delays on weekends and holidays on the eastern side of the corridor while the western side experiences work trip delays during the week. This project began in 2000 and a revised programmatic draft EIS was issued in 2004. Twenty-one action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this first tier programmatic final EIS. The preferred alternative consists of near-term and general long-term improvements for the Corridor to meet the travel demand for 2050 and address immediate Corridor needs. To address future uncertainties, trigger points and stakeholder involvement would be used to reassess needs and to determine the most appropriate transportation improvements to meet future demand. The preferred alternative would implement a multimodal solution and include non-infrastructure related components, an advanced guideway system, and highway improvements. A specific advanced guideway system technology would be determined in subsequent study or a Tier 2 process and would be deployed to provide transit service from the Eagle County Regional Airport to C-470, a distance of 118 miles. It would be a fully elevated transit system on two tracks aligned to the north, south, or in the median of I-70. The system would connect to the regional transportation district network in Jefferson County and local and regional transit services at most of the 15 proposed transit stations along the route. The advanced guideway system would require new tunnel bores at both the Eisenhower-Johnson Memorial Tunnels and the Twin Tunnels. The six-lane highway widening improvements included with the preferred alternative maximum program have both 55 miles per hour (mph) and 65 mph design options. The 55 mph option would use the existing I-70 alignment. The 65 mph design would require additional tunnels at Dowd Canyon, Hidden Valley, and Floyd Hill. At Dowd Canyon, two tunnels would be required for eastbound and westbound traffic. The preferred alternative identifies a minimum and maximum range of multi-modal improvements ranging in cost from $16.1 billion to $20.2 billion estimated in year of expenditure dollars and assuming the mid year of construction for the whole alternative is 2025. The 21 action alternatives evaluated in this document range in cost from $1.9 billion to $20.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would increase capacity, improve accessibility and mobility, and decrease congestion for travel demand to destinations along the I-70 Mountain Corridor as well as for interstate travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Automobile and truck traffic would continue to degrade air quality, displace key wildlife habitat, and impede and endanger wildlife movements. Contamination from vehicles which then is washed into nearby streams would impact water quality. Under the preferred alternative, the increase in runoff would range from 16 percent to 24 percent. Removal, modification or disturbance of habitat for aquatic species would occur. Historic resources that could be affected include several nationally significant properties, including the Georgetown-Silver Plume National Historic Landmark District and as many as 75 different historic properties. Geologic hazards would need careful examination during Tier 2 processes to locate and design improvements to minimize effects. The preferred alternative would affect between 65 and 90 recreation sites. Transportation energy consumption would increase significantly, particularly under modal options involving highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the original and revised draft EISs, see 05-0396D, Volume 29, Number 3 and 10-0498D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110073, Final EIS--527 pages, Appendices--855 pages, Technical Reports--6 volumes, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 33 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Biologic Surveys KW - Cost Assessments KW - Energy Consumption KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Indian Reservations KW - Paleontological Sites KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127795?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 32 of 39] T2 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873127793; 14829-3_0032 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements along the 144-mile-long Interstate 70 (I-70) Mountain Corridor between Glenwood Springs and State Route 470 (C-470), Garfield, Eagle, Summit, Clear Creek and Jefferson counties, Colorado are proposed. The I-70 highway is the only east-west interstate to cross Colorado, directly serves more than 20 communities and a number of major ski resorts, provides access to the White River National Forest and the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests, and is an important freight corridor. Population growth in the Corridor and in the Denver metropolitan area has increased traffic volumes and recreational travelers currently experience substantial delays on weekends and holidays on the eastern side of the corridor while the western side experiences work trip delays during the week. This project began in 2000 and a revised programmatic draft EIS was issued in 2004. Twenty-one action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this first tier programmatic final EIS. The preferred alternative consists of near-term and general long-term improvements for the Corridor to meet the travel demand for 2050 and address immediate Corridor needs. To address future uncertainties, trigger points and stakeholder involvement would be used to reassess needs and to determine the most appropriate transportation improvements to meet future demand. The preferred alternative would implement a multimodal solution and include non-infrastructure related components, an advanced guideway system, and highway improvements. A specific advanced guideway system technology would be determined in subsequent study or a Tier 2 process and would be deployed to provide transit service from the Eagle County Regional Airport to C-470, a distance of 118 miles. It would be a fully elevated transit system on two tracks aligned to the north, south, or in the median of I-70. The system would connect to the regional transportation district network in Jefferson County and local and regional transit services at most of the 15 proposed transit stations along the route. The advanced guideway system would require new tunnel bores at both the Eisenhower-Johnson Memorial Tunnels and the Twin Tunnels. The six-lane highway widening improvements included with the preferred alternative maximum program have both 55 miles per hour (mph) and 65 mph design options. The 55 mph option would use the existing I-70 alignment. The 65 mph design would require additional tunnels at Dowd Canyon, Hidden Valley, and Floyd Hill. At Dowd Canyon, two tunnels would be required for eastbound and westbound traffic. The preferred alternative identifies a minimum and maximum range of multi-modal improvements ranging in cost from $16.1 billion to $20.2 billion estimated in year of expenditure dollars and assuming the mid year of construction for the whole alternative is 2025. The 21 action alternatives evaluated in this document range in cost from $1.9 billion to $20.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would increase capacity, improve accessibility and mobility, and decrease congestion for travel demand to destinations along the I-70 Mountain Corridor as well as for interstate travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Automobile and truck traffic would continue to degrade air quality, displace key wildlife habitat, and impede and endanger wildlife movements. Contamination from vehicles which then is washed into nearby streams would impact water quality. Under the preferred alternative, the increase in runoff would range from 16 percent to 24 percent. Removal, modification or disturbance of habitat for aquatic species would occur. Historic resources that could be affected include several nationally significant properties, including the Georgetown-Silver Plume National Historic Landmark District and as many as 75 different historic properties. Geologic hazards would need careful examination during Tier 2 processes to locate and design improvements to minimize effects. The preferred alternative would affect between 65 and 90 recreation sites. Transportation energy consumption would increase significantly, particularly under modal options involving highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the original and revised draft EISs, see 05-0396D, Volume 29, Number 3 and 10-0498D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110073, Final EIS--527 pages, Appendices--855 pages, Technical Reports--6 volumes, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 32 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Biologic Surveys KW - Cost Assessments KW - Energy Consumption KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Indian Reservations KW - Paleontological Sites KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127793?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 31 of 39] T2 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873127787; 14829-3_0031 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements along the 144-mile-long Interstate 70 (I-70) Mountain Corridor between Glenwood Springs and State Route 470 (C-470), Garfield, Eagle, Summit, Clear Creek and Jefferson counties, Colorado are proposed. The I-70 highway is the only east-west interstate to cross Colorado, directly serves more than 20 communities and a number of major ski resorts, provides access to the White River National Forest and the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests, and is an important freight corridor. Population growth in the Corridor and in the Denver metropolitan area has increased traffic volumes and recreational travelers currently experience substantial delays on weekends and holidays on the eastern side of the corridor while the western side experiences work trip delays during the week. This project began in 2000 and a revised programmatic draft EIS was issued in 2004. Twenty-one action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this first tier programmatic final EIS. The preferred alternative consists of near-term and general long-term improvements for the Corridor to meet the travel demand for 2050 and address immediate Corridor needs. To address future uncertainties, trigger points and stakeholder involvement would be used to reassess needs and to determine the most appropriate transportation improvements to meet future demand. The preferred alternative would implement a multimodal solution and include non-infrastructure related components, an advanced guideway system, and highway improvements. A specific advanced guideway system technology would be determined in subsequent study or a Tier 2 process and would be deployed to provide transit service from the Eagle County Regional Airport to C-470, a distance of 118 miles. It would be a fully elevated transit system on two tracks aligned to the north, south, or in the median of I-70. The system would connect to the regional transportation district network in Jefferson County and local and regional transit services at most of the 15 proposed transit stations along the route. The advanced guideway system would require new tunnel bores at both the Eisenhower-Johnson Memorial Tunnels and the Twin Tunnels. The six-lane highway widening improvements included with the preferred alternative maximum program have both 55 miles per hour (mph) and 65 mph design options. The 55 mph option would use the existing I-70 alignment. The 65 mph design would require additional tunnels at Dowd Canyon, Hidden Valley, and Floyd Hill. At Dowd Canyon, two tunnels would be required for eastbound and westbound traffic. The preferred alternative identifies a minimum and maximum range of multi-modal improvements ranging in cost from $16.1 billion to $20.2 billion estimated in year of expenditure dollars and assuming the mid year of construction for the whole alternative is 2025. The 21 action alternatives evaluated in this document range in cost from $1.9 billion to $20.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would increase capacity, improve accessibility and mobility, and decrease congestion for travel demand to destinations along the I-70 Mountain Corridor as well as for interstate travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Automobile and truck traffic would continue to degrade air quality, displace key wildlife habitat, and impede and endanger wildlife movements. Contamination from vehicles which then is washed into nearby streams would impact water quality. Under the preferred alternative, the increase in runoff would range from 16 percent to 24 percent. Removal, modification or disturbance of habitat for aquatic species would occur. Historic resources that could be affected include several nationally significant properties, including the Georgetown-Silver Plume National Historic Landmark District and as many as 75 different historic properties. Geologic hazards would need careful examination during Tier 2 processes to locate and design improvements to minimize effects. The preferred alternative would affect between 65 and 90 recreation sites. Transportation energy consumption would increase significantly, particularly under modal options involving highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the original and revised draft EISs, see 05-0396D, Volume 29, Number 3 and 10-0498D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110073, Final EIS--527 pages, Appendices--855 pages, Technical Reports--6 volumes, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 31 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Biologic Surveys KW - Cost Assessments KW - Energy Consumption KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Indian Reservations KW - Paleontological Sites KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127787?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 30 of 39] T2 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873127780; 14829-3_0030 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements along the 144-mile-long Interstate 70 (I-70) Mountain Corridor between Glenwood Springs and State Route 470 (C-470), Garfield, Eagle, Summit, Clear Creek and Jefferson counties, Colorado are proposed. The I-70 highway is the only east-west interstate to cross Colorado, directly serves more than 20 communities and a number of major ski resorts, provides access to the White River National Forest and the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests, and is an important freight corridor. Population growth in the Corridor and in the Denver metropolitan area has increased traffic volumes and recreational travelers currently experience substantial delays on weekends and holidays on the eastern side of the corridor while the western side experiences work trip delays during the week. This project began in 2000 and a revised programmatic draft EIS was issued in 2004. Twenty-one action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this first tier programmatic final EIS. The preferred alternative consists of near-term and general long-term improvements for the Corridor to meet the travel demand for 2050 and address immediate Corridor needs. To address future uncertainties, trigger points and stakeholder involvement would be used to reassess needs and to determine the most appropriate transportation improvements to meet future demand. The preferred alternative would implement a multimodal solution and include non-infrastructure related components, an advanced guideway system, and highway improvements. A specific advanced guideway system technology would be determined in subsequent study or a Tier 2 process and would be deployed to provide transit service from the Eagle County Regional Airport to C-470, a distance of 118 miles. It would be a fully elevated transit system on two tracks aligned to the north, south, or in the median of I-70. The system would connect to the regional transportation district network in Jefferson County and local and regional transit services at most of the 15 proposed transit stations along the route. The advanced guideway system would require new tunnel bores at both the Eisenhower-Johnson Memorial Tunnels and the Twin Tunnels. The six-lane highway widening improvements included with the preferred alternative maximum program have both 55 miles per hour (mph) and 65 mph design options. The 55 mph option would use the existing I-70 alignment. The 65 mph design would require additional tunnels at Dowd Canyon, Hidden Valley, and Floyd Hill. At Dowd Canyon, two tunnels would be required for eastbound and westbound traffic. The preferred alternative identifies a minimum and maximum range of multi-modal improvements ranging in cost from $16.1 billion to $20.2 billion estimated in year of expenditure dollars and assuming the mid year of construction for the whole alternative is 2025. The 21 action alternatives evaluated in this document range in cost from $1.9 billion to $20.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would increase capacity, improve accessibility and mobility, and decrease congestion for travel demand to destinations along the I-70 Mountain Corridor as well as for interstate travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Automobile and truck traffic would continue to degrade air quality, displace key wildlife habitat, and impede and endanger wildlife movements. Contamination from vehicles which then is washed into nearby streams would impact water quality. Under the preferred alternative, the increase in runoff would range from 16 percent to 24 percent. Removal, modification or disturbance of habitat for aquatic species would occur. Historic resources that could be affected include several nationally significant properties, including the Georgetown-Silver Plume National Historic Landmark District and as many as 75 different historic properties. Geologic hazards would need careful examination during Tier 2 processes to locate and design improvements to minimize effects. The preferred alternative would affect between 65 and 90 recreation sites. Transportation energy consumption would increase significantly, particularly under modal options involving highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the original and revised draft EISs, see 05-0396D, Volume 29, Number 3 and 10-0498D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110073, Final EIS--527 pages, Appendices--855 pages, Technical Reports--6 volumes, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 30 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Biologic Surveys KW - Cost Assessments KW - Energy Consumption KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Indian Reservations KW - Paleontological Sites KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127780?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 29 of 39] T2 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873127776; 14829-3_0029 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements along the 144-mile-long Interstate 70 (I-70) Mountain Corridor between Glenwood Springs and State Route 470 (C-470), Garfield, Eagle, Summit, Clear Creek and Jefferson counties, Colorado are proposed. The I-70 highway is the only east-west interstate to cross Colorado, directly serves more than 20 communities and a number of major ski resorts, provides access to the White River National Forest and the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests, and is an important freight corridor. Population growth in the Corridor and in the Denver metropolitan area has increased traffic volumes and recreational travelers currently experience substantial delays on weekends and holidays on the eastern side of the corridor while the western side experiences work trip delays during the week. This project began in 2000 and a revised programmatic draft EIS was issued in 2004. Twenty-one action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this first tier programmatic final EIS. The preferred alternative consists of near-term and general long-term improvements for the Corridor to meet the travel demand for 2050 and address immediate Corridor needs. To address future uncertainties, trigger points and stakeholder involvement would be used to reassess needs and to determine the most appropriate transportation improvements to meet future demand. The preferred alternative would implement a multimodal solution and include non-infrastructure related components, an advanced guideway system, and highway improvements. A specific advanced guideway system technology would be determined in subsequent study or a Tier 2 process and would be deployed to provide transit service from the Eagle County Regional Airport to C-470, a distance of 118 miles. It would be a fully elevated transit system on two tracks aligned to the north, south, or in the median of I-70. The system would connect to the regional transportation district network in Jefferson County and local and regional transit services at most of the 15 proposed transit stations along the route. The advanced guideway system would require new tunnel bores at both the Eisenhower-Johnson Memorial Tunnels and the Twin Tunnels. The six-lane highway widening improvements included with the preferred alternative maximum program have both 55 miles per hour (mph) and 65 mph design options. The 55 mph option would use the existing I-70 alignment. The 65 mph design would require additional tunnels at Dowd Canyon, Hidden Valley, and Floyd Hill. At Dowd Canyon, two tunnels would be required for eastbound and westbound traffic. The preferred alternative identifies a minimum and maximum range of multi-modal improvements ranging in cost from $16.1 billion to $20.2 billion estimated in year of expenditure dollars and assuming the mid year of construction for the whole alternative is 2025. The 21 action alternatives evaluated in this document range in cost from $1.9 billion to $20.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would increase capacity, improve accessibility and mobility, and decrease congestion for travel demand to destinations along the I-70 Mountain Corridor as well as for interstate travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Automobile and truck traffic would continue to degrade air quality, displace key wildlife habitat, and impede and endanger wildlife movements. Contamination from vehicles which then is washed into nearby streams would impact water quality. Under the preferred alternative, the increase in runoff would range from 16 percent to 24 percent. Removal, modification or disturbance of habitat for aquatic species would occur. Historic resources that could be affected include several nationally significant properties, including the Georgetown-Silver Plume National Historic Landmark District and as many as 75 different historic properties. Geologic hazards would need careful examination during Tier 2 processes to locate and design improvements to minimize effects. The preferred alternative would affect between 65 and 90 recreation sites. Transportation energy consumption would increase significantly, particularly under modal options involving highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the original and revised draft EISs, see 05-0396D, Volume 29, Number 3 and 10-0498D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110073, Final EIS--527 pages, Appendices--855 pages, Technical Reports--6 volumes, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 29 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Biologic Surveys KW - Cost Assessments KW - Energy Consumption KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Indian Reservations KW - Paleontological Sites KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127776?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 22 of 39] T2 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873127774; 14829-3_0022 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements along the 144-mile-long Interstate 70 (I-70) Mountain Corridor between Glenwood Springs and State Route 470 (C-470), Garfield, Eagle, Summit, Clear Creek and Jefferson counties, Colorado are proposed. The I-70 highway is the only east-west interstate to cross Colorado, directly serves more than 20 communities and a number of major ski resorts, provides access to the White River National Forest and the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests, and is an important freight corridor. Population growth in the Corridor and in the Denver metropolitan area has increased traffic volumes and recreational travelers currently experience substantial delays on weekends and holidays on the eastern side of the corridor while the western side experiences work trip delays during the week. This project began in 2000 and a revised programmatic draft EIS was issued in 2004. Twenty-one action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this first tier programmatic final EIS. The preferred alternative consists of near-term and general long-term improvements for the Corridor to meet the travel demand for 2050 and address immediate Corridor needs. To address future uncertainties, trigger points and stakeholder involvement would be used to reassess needs and to determine the most appropriate transportation improvements to meet future demand. The preferred alternative would implement a multimodal solution and include non-infrastructure related components, an advanced guideway system, and highway improvements. A specific advanced guideway system technology would be determined in subsequent study or a Tier 2 process and would be deployed to provide transit service from the Eagle County Regional Airport to C-470, a distance of 118 miles. It would be a fully elevated transit system on two tracks aligned to the north, south, or in the median of I-70. The system would connect to the regional transportation district network in Jefferson County and local and regional transit services at most of the 15 proposed transit stations along the route. The advanced guideway system would require new tunnel bores at both the Eisenhower-Johnson Memorial Tunnels and the Twin Tunnels. The six-lane highway widening improvements included with the preferred alternative maximum program have both 55 miles per hour (mph) and 65 mph design options. The 55 mph option would use the existing I-70 alignment. The 65 mph design would require additional tunnels at Dowd Canyon, Hidden Valley, and Floyd Hill. At Dowd Canyon, two tunnels would be required for eastbound and westbound traffic. The preferred alternative identifies a minimum and maximum range of multi-modal improvements ranging in cost from $16.1 billion to $20.2 billion estimated in year of expenditure dollars and assuming the mid year of construction for the whole alternative is 2025. The 21 action alternatives evaluated in this document range in cost from $1.9 billion to $20.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would increase capacity, improve accessibility and mobility, and decrease congestion for travel demand to destinations along the I-70 Mountain Corridor as well as for interstate travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Automobile and truck traffic would continue to degrade air quality, displace key wildlife habitat, and impede and endanger wildlife movements. Contamination from vehicles which then is washed into nearby streams would impact water quality. Under the preferred alternative, the increase in runoff would range from 16 percent to 24 percent. Removal, modification or disturbance of habitat for aquatic species would occur. Historic resources that could be affected include several nationally significant properties, including the Georgetown-Silver Plume National Historic Landmark District and as many as 75 different historic properties. Geologic hazards would need careful examination during Tier 2 processes to locate and design improvements to minimize effects. The preferred alternative would affect between 65 and 90 recreation sites. Transportation energy consumption would increase significantly, particularly under modal options involving highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the original and revised draft EISs, see 05-0396D, Volume 29, Number 3 and 10-0498D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110073, Final EIS--527 pages, Appendices--855 pages, Technical Reports--6 volumes, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 22 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Biologic Surveys KW - Cost Assessments KW - Energy Consumption KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Indian Reservations KW - Paleontological Sites KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127774?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 20 of 39] T2 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873127762; 14829-3_0020 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements along the 144-mile-long Interstate 70 (I-70) Mountain Corridor between Glenwood Springs and State Route 470 (C-470), Garfield, Eagle, Summit, Clear Creek and Jefferson counties, Colorado are proposed. The I-70 highway is the only east-west interstate to cross Colorado, directly serves more than 20 communities and a number of major ski resorts, provides access to the White River National Forest and the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests, and is an important freight corridor. Population growth in the Corridor and in the Denver metropolitan area has increased traffic volumes and recreational travelers currently experience substantial delays on weekends and holidays on the eastern side of the corridor while the western side experiences work trip delays during the week. This project began in 2000 and a revised programmatic draft EIS was issued in 2004. Twenty-one action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this first tier programmatic final EIS. The preferred alternative consists of near-term and general long-term improvements for the Corridor to meet the travel demand for 2050 and address immediate Corridor needs. To address future uncertainties, trigger points and stakeholder involvement would be used to reassess needs and to determine the most appropriate transportation improvements to meet future demand. The preferred alternative would implement a multimodal solution and include non-infrastructure related components, an advanced guideway system, and highway improvements. A specific advanced guideway system technology would be determined in subsequent study or a Tier 2 process and would be deployed to provide transit service from the Eagle County Regional Airport to C-470, a distance of 118 miles. It would be a fully elevated transit system on two tracks aligned to the north, south, or in the median of I-70. The system would connect to the regional transportation district network in Jefferson County and local and regional transit services at most of the 15 proposed transit stations along the route. The advanced guideway system would require new tunnel bores at both the Eisenhower-Johnson Memorial Tunnels and the Twin Tunnels. The six-lane highway widening improvements included with the preferred alternative maximum program have both 55 miles per hour (mph) and 65 mph design options. The 55 mph option would use the existing I-70 alignment. The 65 mph design would require additional tunnels at Dowd Canyon, Hidden Valley, and Floyd Hill. At Dowd Canyon, two tunnels would be required for eastbound and westbound traffic. The preferred alternative identifies a minimum and maximum range of multi-modal improvements ranging in cost from $16.1 billion to $20.2 billion estimated in year of expenditure dollars and assuming the mid year of construction for the whole alternative is 2025. The 21 action alternatives evaluated in this document range in cost from $1.9 billion to $20.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would increase capacity, improve accessibility and mobility, and decrease congestion for travel demand to destinations along the I-70 Mountain Corridor as well as for interstate travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Automobile and truck traffic would continue to degrade air quality, displace key wildlife habitat, and impede and endanger wildlife movements. Contamination from vehicles which then is washed into nearby streams would impact water quality. Under the preferred alternative, the increase in runoff would range from 16 percent to 24 percent. Removal, modification or disturbance of habitat for aquatic species would occur. Historic resources that could be affected include several nationally significant properties, including the Georgetown-Silver Plume National Historic Landmark District and as many as 75 different historic properties. Geologic hazards would need careful examination during Tier 2 processes to locate and design improvements to minimize effects. The preferred alternative would affect between 65 and 90 recreation sites. Transportation energy consumption would increase significantly, particularly under modal options involving highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the original and revised draft EISs, see 05-0396D, Volume 29, Number 3 and 10-0498D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110073, Final EIS--527 pages, Appendices--855 pages, Technical Reports--6 volumes, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 20 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Biologic Surveys KW - Cost Assessments KW - Energy Consumption KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Indian Reservations KW - Paleontological Sites KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127762?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 18 of 39] T2 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873127756; 14829-3_0018 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements along the 144-mile-long Interstate 70 (I-70) Mountain Corridor between Glenwood Springs and State Route 470 (C-470), Garfield, Eagle, Summit, Clear Creek and Jefferson counties, Colorado are proposed. The I-70 highway is the only east-west interstate to cross Colorado, directly serves more than 20 communities and a number of major ski resorts, provides access to the White River National Forest and the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests, and is an important freight corridor. Population growth in the Corridor and in the Denver metropolitan area has increased traffic volumes and recreational travelers currently experience substantial delays on weekends and holidays on the eastern side of the corridor while the western side experiences work trip delays during the week. This project began in 2000 and a revised programmatic draft EIS was issued in 2004. Twenty-one action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this first tier programmatic final EIS. The preferred alternative consists of near-term and general long-term improvements for the Corridor to meet the travel demand for 2050 and address immediate Corridor needs. To address future uncertainties, trigger points and stakeholder involvement would be used to reassess needs and to determine the most appropriate transportation improvements to meet future demand. The preferred alternative would implement a multimodal solution and include non-infrastructure related components, an advanced guideway system, and highway improvements. A specific advanced guideway system technology would be determined in subsequent study or a Tier 2 process and would be deployed to provide transit service from the Eagle County Regional Airport to C-470, a distance of 118 miles. It would be a fully elevated transit system on two tracks aligned to the north, south, or in the median of I-70. The system would connect to the regional transportation district network in Jefferson County and local and regional transit services at most of the 15 proposed transit stations along the route. The advanced guideway system would require new tunnel bores at both the Eisenhower-Johnson Memorial Tunnels and the Twin Tunnels. The six-lane highway widening improvements included with the preferred alternative maximum program have both 55 miles per hour (mph) and 65 mph design options. The 55 mph option would use the existing I-70 alignment. The 65 mph design would require additional tunnels at Dowd Canyon, Hidden Valley, and Floyd Hill. At Dowd Canyon, two tunnels would be required for eastbound and westbound traffic. The preferred alternative identifies a minimum and maximum range of multi-modal improvements ranging in cost from $16.1 billion to $20.2 billion estimated in year of expenditure dollars and assuming the mid year of construction for the whole alternative is 2025. The 21 action alternatives evaluated in this document range in cost from $1.9 billion to $20.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would increase capacity, improve accessibility and mobility, and decrease congestion for travel demand to destinations along the I-70 Mountain Corridor as well as for interstate travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Automobile and truck traffic would continue to degrade air quality, displace key wildlife habitat, and impede and endanger wildlife movements. Contamination from vehicles which then is washed into nearby streams would impact water quality. Under the preferred alternative, the increase in runoff would range from 16 percent to 24 percent. Removal, modification or disturbance of habitat for aquatic species would occur. Historic resources that could be affected include several nationally significant properties, including the Georgetown-Silver Plume National Historic Landmark District and as many as 75 different historic properties. Geologic hazards would need careful examination during Tier 2 processes to locate and design improvements to minimize effects. The preferred alternative would affect between 65 and 90 recreation sites. Transportation energy consumption would increase significantly, particularly under modal options involving highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the original and revised draft EISs, see 05-0396D, Volume 29, Number 3 and 10-0498D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110073, Final EIS--527 pages, Appendices--855 pages, Technical Reports--6 volumes, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 18 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Biologic Surveys KW - Cost Assessments KW - Energy Consumption KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Indian Reservations KW - Paleontological Sites KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127756?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 17 of 39] T2 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873127753; 14829-3_0017 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements along the 144-mile-long Interstate 70 (I-70) Mountain Corridor between Glenwood Springs and State Route 470 (C-470), Garfield, Eagle, Summit, Clear Creek and Jefferson counties, Colorado are proposed. The I-70 highway is the only east-west interstate to cross Colorado, directly serves more than 20 communities and a number of major ski resorts, provides access to the White River National Forest and the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests, and is an important freight corridor. Population growth in the Corridor and in the Denver metropolitan area has increased traffic volumes and recreational travelers currently experience substantial delays on weekends and holidays on the eastern side of the corridor while the western side experiences work trip delays during the week. This project began in 2000 and a revised programmatic draft EIS was issued in 2004. Twenty-one action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this first tier programmatic final EIS. The preferred alternative consists of near-term and general long-term improvements for the Corridor to meet the travel demand for 2050 and address immediate Corridor needs. To address future uncertainties, trigger points and stakeholder involvement would be used to reassess needs and to determine the most appropriate transportation improvements to meet future demand. The preferred alternative would implement a multimodal solution and include non-infrastructure related components, an advanced guideway system, and highway improvements. A specific advanced guideway system technology would be determined in subsequent study or a Tier 2 process and would be deployed to provide transit service from the Eagle County Regional Airport to C-470, a distance of 118 miles. It would be a fully elevated transit system on two tracks aligned to the north, south, or in the median of I-70. The system would connect to the regional transportation district network in Jefferson County and local and regional transit services at most of the 15 proposed transit stations along the route. The advanced guideway system would require new tunnel bores at both the Eisenhower-Johnson Memorial Tunnels and the Twin Tunnels. The six-lane highway widening improvements included with the preferred alternative maximum program have both 55 miles per hour (mph) and 65 mph design options. The 55 mph option would use the existing I-70 alignment. The 65 mph design would require additional tunnels at Dowd Canyon, Hidden Valley, and Floyd Hill. At Dowd Canyon, two tunnels would be required for eastbound and westbound traffic. The preferred alternative identifies a minimum and maximum range of multi-modal improvements ranging in cost from $16.1 billion to $20.2 billion estimated in year of expenditure dollars and assuming the mid year of construction for the whole alternative is 2025. The 21 action alternatives evaluated in this document range in cost from $1.9 billion to $20.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would increase capacity, improve accessibility and mobility, and decrease congestion for travel demand to destinations along the I-70 Mountain Corridor as well as for interstate travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Automobile and truck traffic would continue to degrade air quality, displace key wildlife habitat, and impede and endanger wildlife movements. Contamination from vehicles which then is washed into nearby streams would impact water quality. Under the preferred alternative, the increase in runoff would range from 16 percent to 24 percent. Removal, modification or disturbance of habitat for aquatic species would occur. Historic resources that could be affected include several nationally significant properties, including the Georgetown-Silver Plume National Historic Landmark District and as many as 75 different historic properties. Geologic hazards would need careful examination during Tier 2 processes to locate and design improvements to minimize effects. The preferred alternative would affect between 65 and 90 recreation sites. Transportation energy consumption would increase significantly, particularly under modal options involving highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the original and revised draft EISs, see 05-0396D, Volume 29, Number 3 and 10-0498D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110073, Final EIS--527 pages, Appendices--855 pages, Technical Reports--6 volumes, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 17 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Biologic Surveys KW - Cost Assessments KW - Energy Consumption KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Indian Reservations KW - Paleontological Sites KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127753?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116) (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF JULY 2010). [Part 1 of 18] T2 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116) (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF JULY 2010). AN - 873127530; 14828-2_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The construction, operation, and reactivation of 20 miles of rail line in Clearfield and Centre counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. On May 20, 2008, R.J. Corman Railroad Company/Pennsylvania Lines Inc. (RJCP) filed a petition for an exemption from the prior approval requirements to construct and operate an abandoned 10.8-mile rail line between Wallaceton and Winburne in Clearfield County (the Western Segment) and to reactivate a connecting 9.3-mile portion of currently rail banked line between Winburne and Gorton in Clearfield and Centre Counties (the Eastern Segment). The proposed rail line would serve a new waste-to-ethanol facility, quarry, landfill, and industrial park currently being developed by Resource Recovery, LLC (RRLLC), near Gorton, Pennsylvania, as well as several other interested shippers. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to the proposed landfill, quarry, and industrial park development, and the planned transport of municipal solid waste by RJCP. Concerns include the potential for odors, vermin/vectors for disease, containment during transport, leakage during transport, environmental damage associated with a potential derailment, and quality of life issues for adjacent property owners. In addition to the proposed action, the draft EIS of July 2010 evaluated a No Action Alternative, a modified proposed action that would use an alternate route for a portion of the Western Segment, and a No-Build Alternative that would involve a local road system upgrade. The modified proposed action would entail continued use of RJCPs existing Wallaceton Subdivision line south of Wallaceton to a point near Philipsburg where a new connection would be built to another 5.8-mile abandoned rail line leading northeast to Munson (formerly referred to as the Philipsburg Industrial Track). Under either of the build alternatives, RJCP proposes to construct a single-track line on a 66-foot right-of-way over the 20-mile project length and to operate common carrier service over the line. At peak capacity, RJCP anticipates that it would serve the RRLLC development and other local shippers with one or at most two unit trains daily. The local road system upgrade alternative would involve improving the existing local road system to accommodate the anticipated volume of truck traffic generated by RRLLCs proposed development and interested shippers who would use the proposed rail line if it were available. This draft supplemental EIS addresses: 1) the potential impacts associated with RJCPs proposed transport of ethanol, a regulated hazardous material, over the rail line; 2) the change in the preliminary plan approval status of the No-Build Alternative (Black Rock Road upgrade); and 3) the results of the 2010 summer field survey for branching bur-reed. The modified proposed action is the environmentally preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide rail transportation service to RRLLC and several other shippers. The proposed rail line could keep up to 1,100 trucks per day off the local road system. The 25-mile-per-hour maximum operation speed would reduce the already extremely low probability of occurrence for a train accident resulting in release of ethanol. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Reactivation of the rail banked Eastern Segment would result in the loss of 9.3 miles of the Snow Shoe Multi-Use Rail Trail. Implementation of the modified proposed action would impact 3.4 acres of wetlands, cross five public roads and two private driveways, and create noise impacts to 32 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: National Trails System Act of 1968. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0482D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110072, 195 pages, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Health Hazards KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Roads KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Waste Management KW - Wetlands KW - Pennsylvania KW - National Trails System Act of 1968, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127530?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%29+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+JULY+2010%29.&rft.title=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%29+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+JULY+2010%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116) (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF JULY 2010). [Part 2 of 18] T2 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116) (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF JULY 2010). AN - 873127482; 14828-2_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The construction, operation, and reactivation of 20 miles of rail line in Clearfield and Centre counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. On May 20, 2008, R.J. Corman Railroad Company/Pennsylvania Lines Inc. (RJCP) filed a petition for an exemption from the prior approval requirements to construct and operate an abandoned 10.8-mile rail line between Wallaceton and Winburne in Clearfield County (the Western Segment) and to reactivate a connecting 9.3-mile portion of currently rail banked line between Winburne and Gorton in Clearfield and Centre Counties (the Eastern Segment). The proposed rail line would serve a new waste-to-ethanol facility, quarry, landfill, and industrial park currently being developed by Resource Recovery, LLC (RRLLC), near Gorton, Pennsylvania, as well as several other interested shippers. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to the proposed landfill, quarry, and industrial park development, and the planned transport of municipal solid waste by RJCP. Concerns include the potential for odors, vermin/vectors for disease, containment during transport, leakage during transport, environmental damage associated with a potential derailment, and quality of life issues for adjacent property owners. In addition to the proposed action, the draft EIS of July 2010 evaluated a No Action Alternative, a modified proposed action that would use an alternate route for a portion of the Western Segment, and a No-Build Alternative that would involve a local road system upgrade. The modified proposed action would entail continued use of RJCPs existing Wallaceton Subdivision line south of Wallaceton to a point near Philipsburg where a new connection would be built to another 5.8-mile abandoned rail line leading northeast to Munson (formerly referred to as the Philipsburg Industrial Track). Under either of the build alternatives, RJCP proposes to construct a single-track line on a 66-foot right-of-way over the 20-mile project length and to operate common carrier service over the line. At peak capacity, RJCP anticipates that it would serve the RRLLC development and other local shippers with one or at most two unit trains daily. The local road system upgrade alternative would involve improving the existing local road system to accommodate the anticipated volume of truck traffic generated by RRLLCs proposed development and interested shippers who would use the proposed rail line if it were available. This draft supplemental EIS addresses: 1) the potential impacts associated with RJCPs proposed transport of ethanol, a regulated hazardous material, over the rail line; 2) the change in the preliminary plan approval status of the No-Build Alternative (Black Rock Road upgrade); and 3) the results of the 2010 summer field survey for branching bur-reed. The modified proposed action is the environmentally preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide rail transportation service to RRLLC and several other shippers. The proposed rail line could keep up to 1,100 trucks per day off the local road system. The 25-mile-per-hour maximum operation speed would reduce the already extremely low probability of occurrence for a train accident resulting in release of ethanol. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Reactivation of the rail banked Eastern Segment would result in the loss of 9.3 miles of the Snow Shoe Multi-Use Rail Trail. Implementation of the modified proposed action would impact 3.4 acres of wetlands, cross five public roads and two private driveways, and create noise impacts to 32 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: National Trails System Act of 1968. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0482D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110072, 195 pages, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Health Hazards KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Roads KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Waste Management KW - Wetlands KW - Pennsylvania KW - National Trails System Act of 1968, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127482?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%29+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+JULY+2010%29.&rft.title=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%29+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+JULY+2010%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 28 of 39] T2 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873127301; 14829-3_0028 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements along the 144-mile-long Interstate 70 (I-70) Mountain Corridor between Glenwood Springs and State Route 470 (C-470), Garfield, Eagle, Summit, Clear Creek and Jefferson counties, Colorado are proposed. The I-70 highway is the only east-west interstate to cross Colorado, directly serves more than 20 communities and a number of major ski resorts, provides access to the White River National Forest and the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests, and is an important freight corridor. Population growth in the Corridor and in the Denver metropolitan area has increased traffic volumes and recreational travelers currently experience substantial delays on weekends and holidays on the eastern side of the corridor while the western side experiences work trip delays during the week. This project began in 2000 and a revised programmatic draft EIS was issued in 2004. Twenty-one action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this first tier programmatic final EIS. The preferred alternative consists of near-term and general long-term improvements for the Corridor to meet the travel demand for 2050 and address immediate Corridor needs. To address future uncertainties, trigger points and stakeholder involvement would be used to reassess needs and to determine the most appropriate transportation improvements to meet future demand. The preferred alternative would implement a multimodal solution and include non-infrastructure related components, an advanced guideway system, and highway improvements. A specific advanced guideway system technology would be determined in subsequent study or a Tier 2 process and would be deployed to provide transit service from the Eagle County Regional Airport to C-470, a distance of 118 miles. It would be a fully elevated transit system on two tracks aligned to the north, south, or in the median of I-70. The system would connect to the regional transportation district network in Jefferson County and local and regional transit services at most of the 15 proposed transit stations along the route. The advanced guideway system would require new tunnel bores at both the Eisenhower-Johnson Memorial Tunnels and the Twin Tunnels. The six-lane highway widening improvements included with the preferred alternative maximum program have both 55 miles per hour (mph) and 65 mph design options. The 55 mph option would use the existing I-70 alignment. The 65 mph design would require additional tunnels at Dowd Canyon, Hidden Valley, and Floyd Hill. At Dowd Canyon, two tunnels would be required for eastbound and westbound traffic. The preferred alternative identifies a minimum and maximum range of multi-modal improvements ranging in cost from $16.1 billion to $20.2 billion estimated in year of expenditure dollars and assuming the mid year of construction for the whole alternative is 2025. The 21 action alternatives evaluated in this document range in cost from $1.9 billion to $20.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would increase capacity, improve accessibility and mobility, and decrease congestion for travel demand to destinations along the I-70 Mountain Corridor as well as for interstate travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Automobile and truck traffic would continue to degrade air quality, displace key wildlife habitat, and impede and endanger wildlife movements. Contamination from vehicles which then is washed into nearby streams would impact water quality. Under the preferred alternative, the increase in runoff would range from 16 percent to 24 percent. Removal, modification or disturbance of habitat for aquatic species would occur. Historic resources that could be affected include several nationally significant properties, including the Georgetown-Silver Plume National Historic Landmark District and as many as 75 different historic properties. Geologic hazards would need careful examination during Tier 2 processes to locate and design improvements to minimize effects. The preferred alternative would affect between 65 and 90 recreation sites. Transportation energy consumption would increase significantly, particularly under modal options involving highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the original and revised draft EISs, see 05-0396D, Volume 29, Number 3 and 10-0498D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110073, Final EIS--527 pages, Appendices--855 pages, Technical Reports--6 volumes, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 28 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Biologic Surveys KW - Cost Assessments KW - Energy Consumption KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Indian Reservations KW - Paleontological Sites KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127301?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 27 of 39] T2 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873127294; 14829-3_0027 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements along the 144-mile-long Interstate 70 (I-70) Mountain Corridor between Glenwood Springs and State Route 470 (C-470), Garfield, Eagle, Summit, Clear Creek and Jefferson counties, Colorado are proposed. The I-70 highway is the only east-west interstate to cross Colorado, directly serves more than 20 communities and a number of major ski resorts, provides access to the White River National Forest and the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests, and is an important freight corridor. Population growth in the Corridor and in the Denver metropolitan area has increased traffic volumes and recreational travelers currently experience substantial delays on weekends and holidays on the eastern side of the corridor while the western side experiences work trip delays during the week. This project began in 2000 and a revised programmatic draft EIS was issued in 2004. Twenty-one action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this first tier programmatic final EIS. The preferred alternative consists of near-term and general long-term improvements for the Corridor to meet the travel demand for 2050 and address immediate Corridor needs. To address future uncertainties, trigger points and stakeholder involvement would be used to reassess needs and to determine the most appropriate transportation improvements to meet future demand. The preferred alternative would implement a multimodal solution and include non-infrastructure related components, an advanced guideway system, and highway improvements. A specific advanced guideway system technology would be determined in subsequent study or a Tier 2 process and would be deployed to provide transit service from the Eagle County Regional Airport to C-470, a distance of 118 miles. It would be a fully elevated transit system on two tracks aligned to the north, south, or in the median of I-70. The system would connect to the regional transportation district network in Jefferson County and local and regional transit services at most of the 15 proposed transit stations along the route. The advanced guideway system would require new tunnel bores at both the Eisenhower-Johnson Memorial Tunnels and the Twin Tunnels. The six-lane highway widening improvements included with the preferred alternative maximum program have both 55 miles per hour (mph) and 65 mph design options. The 55 mph option would use the existing I-70 alignment. The 65 mph design would require additional tunnels at Dowd Canyon, Hidden Valley, and Floyd Hill. At Dowd Canyon, two tunnels would be required for eastbound and westbound traffic. The preferred alternative identifies a minimum and maximum range of multi-modal improvements ranging in cost from $16.1 billion to $20.2 billion estimated in year of expenditure dollars and assuming the mid year of construction for the whole alternative is 2025. The 21 action alternatives evaluated in this document range in cost from $1.9 billion to $20.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would increase capacity, improve accessibility and mobility, and decrease congestion for travel demand to destinations along the I-70 Mountain Corridor as well as for interstate travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Automobile and truck traffic would continue to degrade air quality, displace key wildlife habitat, and impede and endanger wildlife movements. Contamination from vehicles which then is washed into nearby streams would impact water quality. Under the preferred alternative, the increase in runoff would range from 16 percent to 24 percent. Removal, modification or disturbance of habitat for aquatic species would occur. Historic resources that could be affected include several nationally significant properties, including the Georgetown-Silver Plume National Historic Landmark District and as many as 75 different historic properties. Geologic hazards would need careful examination during Tier 2 processes to locate and design improvements to minimize effects. The preferred alternative would affect between 65 and 90 recreation sites. Transportation energy consumption would increase significantly, particularly under modal options involving highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the original and revised draft EISs, see 05-0396D, Volume 29, Number 3 and 10-0498D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110073, Final EIS--527 pages, Appendices--855 pages, Technical Reports--6 volumes, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 27 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Biologic Surveys KW - Cost Assessments KW - Energy Consumption KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Indian Reservations KW - Paleontological Sites KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127294?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 26 of 39] T2 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873127285; 14829-3_0026 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements along the 144-mile-long Interstate 70 (I-70) Mountain Corridor between Glenwood Springs and State Route 470 (C-470), Garfield, Eagle, Summit, Clear Creek and Jefferson counties, Colorado are proposed. The I-70 highway is the only east-west interstate to cross Colorado, directly serves more than 20 communities and a number of major ski resorts, provides access to the White River National Forest and the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests, and is an important freight corridor. Population growth in the Corridor and in the Denver metropolitan area has increased traffic volumes and recreational travelers currently experience substantial delays on weekends and holidays on the eastern side of the corridor while the western side experiences work trip delays during the week. This project began in 2000 and a revised programmatic draft EIS was issued in 2004. Twenty-one action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this first tier programmatic final EIS. The preferred alternative consists of near-term and general long-term improvements for the Corridor to meet the travel demand for 2050 and address immediate Corridor needs. To address future uncertainties, trigger points and stakeholder involvement would be used to reassess needs and to determine the most appropriate transportation improvements to meet future demand. The preferred alternative would implement a multimodal solution and include non-infrastructure related components, an advanced guideway system, and highway improvements. A specific advanced guideway system technology would be determined in subsequent study or a Tier 2 process and would be deployed to provide transit service from the Eagle County Regional Airport to C-470, a distance of 118 miles. It would be a fully elevated transit system on two tracks aligned to the north, south, or in the median of I-70. The system would connect to the regional transportation district network in Jefferson County and local and regional transit services at most of the 15 proposed transit stations along the route. The advanced guideway system would require new tunnel bores at both the Eisenhower-Johnson Memorial Tunnels and the Twin Tunnels. The six-lane highway widening improvements included with the preferred alternative maximum program have both 55 miles per hour (mph) and 65 mph design options. The 55 mph option would use the existing I-70 alignment. The 65 mph design would require additional tunnels at Dowd Canyon, Hidden Valley, and Floyd Hill. At Dowd Canyon, two tunnels would be required for eastbound and westbound traffic. The preferred alternative identifies a minimum and maximum range of multi-modal improvements ranging in cost from $16.1 billion to $20.2 billion estimated in year of expenditure dollars and assuming the mid year of construction for the whole alternative is 2025. The 21 action alternatives evaluated in this document range in cost from $1.9 billion to $20.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would increase capacity, improve accessibility and mobility, and decrease congestion for travel demand to destinations along the I-70 Mountain Corridor as well as for interstate travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Automobile and truck traffic would continue to degrade air quality, displace key wildlife habitat, and impede and endanger wildlife movements. Contamination from vehicles which then is washed into nearby streams would impact water quality. Under the preferred alternative, the increase in runoff would range from 16 percent to 24 percent. Removal, modification or disturbance of habitat for aquatic species would occur. Historic resources that could be affected include several nationally significant properties, including the Georgetown-Silver Plume National Historic Landmark District and as many as 75 different historic properties. Geologic hazards would need careful examination during Tier 2 processes to locate and design improvements to minimize effects. The preferred alternative would affect between 65 and 90 recreation sites. Transportation energy consumption would increase significantly, particularly under modal options involving highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the original and revised draft EISs, see 05-0396D, Volume 29, Number 3 and 10-0498D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110073, Final EIS--527 pages, Appendices--855 pages, Technical Reports--6 volumes, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 26 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Biologic Surveys KW - Cost Assessments KW - Energy Consumption KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Indian Reservations KW - Paleontological Sites KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127285?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 25 of 39] T2 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873127283; 14829-3_0025 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements along the 144-mile-long Interstate 70 (I-70) Mountain Corridor between Glenwood Springs and State Route 470 (C-470), Garfield, Eagle, Summit, Clear Creek and Jefferson counties, Colorado are proposed. The I-70 highway is the only east-west interstate to cross Colorado, directly serves more than 20 communities and a number of major ski resorts, provides access to the White River National Forest and the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests, and is an important freight corridor. Population growth in the Corridor and in the Denver metropolitan area has increased traffic volumes and recreational travelers currently experience substantial delays on weekends and holidays on the eastern side of the corridor while the western side experiences work trip delays during the week. This project began in 2000 and a revised programmatic draft EIS was issued in 2004. Twenty-one action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this first tier programmatic final EIS. The preferred alternative consists of near-term and general long-term improvements for the Corridor to meet the travel demand for 2050 and address immediate Corridor needs. To address future uncertainties, trigger points and stakeholder involvement would be used to reassess needs and to determine the most appropriate transportation improvements to meet future demand. The preferred alternative would implement a multimodal solution and include non-infrastructure related components, an advanced guideway system, and highway improvements. A specific advanced guideway system technology would be determined in subsequent study or a Tier 2 process and would be deployed to provide transit service from the Eagle County Regional Airport to C-470, a distance of 118 miles. It would be a fully elevated transit system on two tracks aligned to the north, south, or in the median of I-70. The system would connect to the regional transportation district network in Jefferson County and local and regional transit services at most of the 15 proposed transit stations along the route. The advanced guideway system would require new tunnel bores at both the Eisenhower-Johnson Memorial Tunnels and the Twin Tunnels. The six-lane highway widening improvements included with the preferred alternative maximum program have both 55 miles per hour (mph) and 65 mph design options. The 55 mph option would use the existing I-70 alignment. The 65 mph design would require additional tunnels at Dowd Canyon, Hidden Valley, and Floyd Hill. At Dowd Canyon, two tunnels would be required for eastbound and westbound traffic. The preferred alternative identifies a minimum and maximum range of multi-modal improvements ranging in cost from $16.1 billion to $20.2 billion estimated in year of expenditure dollars and assuming the mid year of construction for the whole alternative is 2025. The 21 action alternatives evaluated in this document range in cost from $1.9 billion to $20.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would increase capacity, improve accessibility and mobility, and decrease congestion for travel demand to destinations along the I-70 Mountain Corridor as well as for interstate travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Automobile and truck traffic would continue to degrade air quality, displace key wildlife habitat, and impede and endanger wildlife movements. Contamination from vehicles which then is washed into nearby streams would impact water quality. Under the preferred alternative, the increase in runoff would range from 16 percent to 24 percent. Removal, modification or disturbance of habitat for aquatic species would occur. Historic resources that could be affected include several nationally significant properties, including the Georgetown-Silver Plume National Historic Landmark District and as many as 75 different historic properties. Geologic hazards would need careful examination during Tier 2 processes to locate and design improvements to minimize effects. The preferred alternative would affect between 65 and 90 recreation sites. Transportation energy consumption would increase significantly, particularly under modal options involving highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the original and revised draft EISs, see 05-0396D, Volume 29, Number 3 and 10-0498D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110073, Final EIS--527 pages, Appendices--855 pages, Technical Reports--6 volumes, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 25 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Biologic Surveys KW - Cost Assessments KW - Energy Consumption KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Indian Reservations KW - Paleontological Sites KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127283?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 24 of 39] T2 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873127280; 14829-3_0024 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements along the 144-mile-long Interstate 70 (I-70) Mountain Corridor between Glenwood Springs and State Route 470 (C-470), Garfield, Eagle, Summit, Clear Creek and Jefferson counties, Colorado are proposed. The I-70 highway is the only east-west interstate to cross Colorado, directly serves more than 20 communities and a number of major ski resorts, provides access to the White River National Forest and the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests, and is an important freight corridor. Population growth in the Corridor and in the Denver metropolitan area has increased traffic volumes and recreational travelers currently experience substantial delays on weekends and holidays on the eastern side of the corridor while the western side experiences work trip delays during the week. This project began in 2000 and a revised programmatic draft EIS was issued in 2004. Twenty-one action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this first tier programmatic final EIS. The preferred alternative consists of near-term and general long-term improvements for the Corridor to meet the travel demand for 2050 and address immediate Corridor needs. To address future uncertainties, trigger points and stakeholder involvement would be used to reassess needs and to determine the most appropriate transportation improvements to meet future demand. The preferred alternative would implement a multimodal solution and include non-infrastructure related components, an advanced guideway system, and highway improvements. A specific advanced guideway system technology would be determined in subsequent study or a Tier 2 process and would be deployed to provide transit service from the Eagle County Regional Airport to C-470, a distance of 118 miles. It would be a fully elevated transit system on two tracks aligned to the north, south, or in the median of I-70. The system would connect to the regional transportation district network in Jefferson County and local and regional transit services at most of the 15 proposed transit stations along the route. The advanced guideway system would require new tunnel bores at both the Eisenhower-Johnson Memorial Tunnels and the Twin Tunnels. The six-lane highway widening improvements included with the preferred alternative maximum program have both 55 miles per hour (mph) and 65 mph design options. The 55 mph option would use the existing I-70 alignment. The 65 mph design would require additional tunnels at Dowd Canyon, Hidden Valley, and Floyd Hill. At Dowd Canyon, two tunnels would be required for eastbound and westbound traffic. The preferred alternative identifies a minimum and maximum range of multi-modal improvements ranging in cost from $16.1 billion to $20.2 billion estimated in year of expenditure dollars and assuming the mid year of construction for the whole alternative is 2025. The 21 action alternatives evaluated in this document range in cost from $1.9 billion to $20.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would increase capacity, improve accessibility and mobility, and decrease congestion for travel demand to destinations along the I-70 Mountain Corridor as well as for interstate travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Automobile and truck traffic would continue to degrade air quality, displace key wildlife habitat, and impede and endanger wildlife movements. Contamination from vehicles which then is washed into nearby streams would impact water quality. Under the preferred alternative, the increase in runoff would range from 16 percent to 24 percent. Removal, modification or disturbance of habitat for aquatic species would occur. Historic resources that could be affected include several nationally significant properties, including the Georgetown-Silver Plume National Historic Landmark District and as many as 75 different historic properties. Geologic hazards would need careful examination during Tier 2 processes to locate and design improvements to minimize effects. The preferred alternative would affect between 65 and 90 recreation sites. Transportation energy consumption would increase significantly, particularly under modal options involving highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the original and revised draft EISs, see 05-0396D, Volume 29, Number 3 and 10-0498D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110073, Final EIS--527 pages, Appendices--855 pages, Technical Reports--6 volumes, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 24 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Biologic Surveys KW - Cost Assessments KW - Energy Consumption KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Indian Reservations KW - Paleontological Sites KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127280?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 23 of 39] T2 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873127275; 14829-3_0023 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements along the 144-mile-long Interstate 70 (I-70) Mountain Corridor between Glenwood Springs and State Route 470 (C-470), Garfield, Eagle, Summit, Clear Creek and Jefferson counties, Colorado are proposed. The I-70 highway is the only east-west interstate to cross Colorado, directly serves more than 20 communities and a number of major ski resorts, provides access to the White River National Forest and the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests, and is an important freight corridor. Population growth in the Corridor and in the Denver metropolitan area has increased traffic volumes and recreational travelers currently experience substantial delays on weekends and holidays on the eastern side of the corridor while the western side experiences work trip delays during the week. This project began in 2000 and a revised programmatic draft EIS was issued in 2004. Twenty-one action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this first tier programmatic final EIS. The preferred alternative consists of near-term and general long-term improvements for the Corridor to meet the travel demand for 2050 and address immediate Corridor needs. To address future uncertainties, trigger points and stakeholder involvement would be used to reassess needs and to determine the most appropriate transportation improvements to meet future demand. The preferred alternative would implement a multimodal solution and include non-infrastructure related components, an advanced guideway system, and highway improvements. A specific advanced guideway system technology would be determined in subsequent study or a Tier 2 process and would be deployed to provide transit service from the Eagle County Regional Airport to C-470, a distance of 118 miles. It would be a fully elevated transit system on two tracks aligned to the north, south, or in the median of I-70. The system would connect to the regional transportation district network in Jefferson County and local and regional transit services at most of the 15 proposed transit stations along the route. The advanced guideway system would require new tunnel bores at both the Eisenhower-Johnson Memorial Tunnels and the Twin Tunnels. The six-lane highway widening improvements included with the preferred alternative maximum program have both 55 miles per hour (mph) and 65 mph design options. The 55 mph option would use the existing I-70 alignment. The 65 mph design would require additional tunnels at Dowd Canyon, Hidden Valley, and Floyd Hill. At Dowd Canyon, two tunnels would be required for eastbound and westbound traffic. The preferred alternative identifies a minimum and maximum range of multi-modal improvements ranging in cost from $16.1 billion to $20.2 billion estimated in year of expenditure dollars and assuming the mid year of construction for the whole alternative is 2025. The 21 action alternatives evaluated in this document range in cost from $1.9 billion to $20.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would increase capacity, improve accessibility and mobility, and decrease congestion for travel demand to destinations along the I-70 Mountain Corridor as well as for interstate travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Automobile and truck traffic would continue to degrade air quality, displace key wildlife habitat, and impede and endanger wildlife movements. Contamination from vehicles which then is washed into nearby streams would impact water quality. Under the preferred alternative, the increase in runoff would range from 16 percent to 24 percent. Removal, modification or disturbance of habitat for aquatic species would occur. Historic resources that could be affected include several nationally significant properties, including the Georgetown-Silver Plume National Historic Landmark District and as many as 75 different historic properties. Geologic hazards would need careful examination during Tier 2 processes to locate and design improvements to minimize effects. The preferred alternative would affect between 65 and 90 recreation sites. Transportation energy consumption would increase significantly, particularly under modal options involving highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the original and revised draft EISs, see 05-0396D, Volume 29, Number 3 and 10-0498D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110073, Final EIS--527 pages, Appendices--855 pages, Technical Reports--6 volumes, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 23 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Biologic Surveys KW - Cost Assessments KW - Energy Consumption KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Indian Reservations KW - Paleontological Sites KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127275?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116) (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF JULY 2010). [Part 13 of 18] T2 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116) (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF JULY 2010). AN - 873127034; 14828-2_0013 AB - PURPOSE: The construction, operation, and reactivation of 20 miles of rail line in Clearfield and Centre counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. On May 20, 2008, R.J. Corman Railroad Company/Pennsylvania Lines Inc. (RJCP) filed a petition for an exemption from the prior approval requirements to construct and operate an abandoned 10.8-mile rail line between Wallaceton and Winburne in Clearfield County (the Western Segment) and to reactivate a connecting 9.3-mile portion of currently rail banked line between Winburne and Gorton in Clearfield and Centre Counties (the Eastern Segment). The proposed rail line would serve a new waste-to-ethanol facility, quarry, landfill, and industrial park currently being developed by Resource Recovery, LLC (RRLLC), near Gorton, Pennsylvania, as well as several other interested shippers. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to the proposed landfill, quarry, and industrial park development, and the planned transport of municipal solid waste by RJCP. Concerns include the potential for odors, vermin/vectors for disease, containment during transport, leakage during transport, environmental damage associated with a potential derailment, and quality of life issues for adjacent property owners. In addition to the proposed action, the draft EIS of July 2010 evaluated a No Action Alternative, a modified proposed action that would use an alternate route for a portion of the Western Segment, and a No-Build Alternative that would involve a local road system upgrade. The modified proposed action would entail continued use of RJCPs existing Wallaceton Subdivision line south of Wallaceton to a point near Philipsburg where a new connection would be built to another 5.8-mile abandoned rail line leading northeast to Munson (formerly referred to as the Philipsburg Industrial Track). Under either of the build alternatives, RJCP proposes to construct a single-track line on a 66-foot right-of-way over the 20-mile project length and to operate common carrier service over the line. At peak capacity, RJCP anticipates that it would serve the RRLLC development and other local shippers with one or at most two unit trains daily. The local road system upgrade alternative would involve improving the existing local road system to accommodate the anticipated volume of truck traffic generated by RRLLCs proposed development and interested shippers who would use the proposed rail line if it were available. This draft supplemental EIS addresses: 1) the potential impacts associated with RJCPs proposed transport of ethanol, a regulated hazardous material, over the rail line; 2) the change in the preliminary plan approval status of the No-Build Alternative (Black Rock Road upgrade); and 3) the results of the 2010 summer field survey for branching bur-reed. The modified proposed action is the environmentally preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide rail transportation service to RRLLC and several other shippers. The proposed rail line could keep up to 1,100 trucks per day off the local road system. The 25-mile-per-hour maximum operation speed would reduce the already extremely low probability of occurrence for a train accident resulting in release of ethanol. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Reactivation of the rail banked Eastern Segment would result in the loss of 9.3 miles of the Snow Shoe Multi-Use Rail Trail. Implementation of the modified proposed action would impact 3.4 acres of wetlands, cross five public roads and two private driveways, and create noise impacts to 32 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: National Trails System Act of 1968. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0482D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110072, 195 pages, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 13 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Health Hazards KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Roads KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Waste Management KW - Wetlands KW - Pennsylvania KW - National Trails System Act of 1968, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127034?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%29+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+JULY+2010%29.&rft.title=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%29+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+JULY+2010%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116) (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF JULY 2010). [Part 12 of 18] T2 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116) (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF JULY 2010). AN - 873127031; 14828-2_0012 AB - PURPOSE: The construction, operation, and reactivation of 20 miles of rail line in Clearfield and Centre counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. On May 20, 2008, R.J. Corman Railroad Company/Pennsylvania Lines Inc. (RJCP) filed a petition for an exemption from the prior approval requirements to construct and operate an abandoned 10.8-mile rail line between Wallaceton and Winburne in Clearfield County (the Western Segment) and to reactivate a connecting 9.3-mile portion of currently rail banked line between Winburne and Gorton in Clearfield and Centre Counties (the Eastern Segment). The proposed rail line would serve a new waste-to-ethanol facility, quarry, landfill, and industrial park currently being developed by Resource Recovery, LLC (RRLLC), near Gorton, Pennsylvania, as well as several other interested shippers. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to the proposed landfill, quarry, and industrial park development, and the planned transport of municipal solid waste by RJCP. Concerns include the potential for odors, vermin/vectors for disease, containment during transport, leakage during transport, environmental damage associated with a potential derailment, and quality of life issues for adjacent property owners. In addition to the proposed action, the draft EIS of July 2010 evaluated a No Action Alternative, a modified proposed action that would use an alternate route for a portion of the Western Segment, and a No-Build Alternative that would involve a local road system upgrade. The modified proposed action would entail continued use of RJCPs existing Wallaceton Subdivision line south of Wallaceton to a point near Philipsburg where a new connection would be built to another 5.8-mile abandoned rail line leading northeast to Munson (formerly referred to as the Philipsburg Industrial Track). Under either of the build alternatives, RJCP proposes to construct a single-track line on a 66-foot right-of-way over the 20-mile project length and to operate common carrier service over the line. At peak capacity, RJCP anticipates that it would serve the RRLLC development and other local shippers with one or at most two unit trains daily. The local road system upgrade alternative would involve improving the existing local road system to accommodate the anticipated volume of truck traffic generated by RRLLCs proposed development and interested shippers who would use the proposed rail line if it were available. This draft supplemental EIS addresses: 1) the potential impacts associated with RJCPs proposed transport of ethanol, a regulated hazardous material, over the rail line; 2) the change in the preliminary plan approval status of the No-Build Alternative (Black Rock Road upgrade); and 3) the results of the 2010 summer field survey for branching bur-reed. The modified proposed action is the environmentally preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide rail transportation service to RRLLC and several other shippers. The proposed rail line could keep up to 1,100 trucks per day off the local road system. The 25-mile-per-hour maximum operation speed would reduce the already extremely low probability of occurrence for a train accident resulting in release of ethanol. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Reactivation of the rail banked Eastern Segment would result in the loss of 9.3 miles of the Snow Shoe Multi-Use Rail Trail. Implementation of the modified proposed action would impact 3.4 acres of wetlands, cross five public roads and two private driveways, and create noise impacts to 32 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: National Trails System Act of 1968. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0482D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110072, 195 pages, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Health Hazards KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Roads KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Waste Management KW - Wetlands KW - Pennsylvania KW - National Trails System Act of 1968, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127031?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%29+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+JULY+2010%29.&rft.title=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%29+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+JULY+2010%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116) (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF JULY 2010). [Part 11 of 18] T2 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116) (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF JULY 2010). AN - 873127023; 14828-2_0011 AB - PURPOSE: The construction, operation, and reactivation of 20 miles of rail line in Clearfield and Centre counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. On May 20, 2008, R.J. Corman Railroad Company/Pennsylvania Lines Inc. (RJCP) filed a petition for an exemption from the prior approval requirements to construct and operate an abandoned 10.8-mile rail line between Wallaceton and Winburne in Clearfield County (the Western Segment) and to reactivate a connecting 9.3-mile portion of currently rail banked line between Winburne and Gorton in Clearfield and Centre Counties (the Eastern Segment). The proposed rail line would serve a new waste-to-ethanol facility, quarry, landfill, and industrial park currently being developed by Resource Recovery, LLC (RRLLC), near Gorton, Pennsylvania, as well as several other interested shippers. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to the proposed landfill, quarry, and industrial park development, and the planned transport of municipal solid waste by RJCP. Concerns include the potential for odors, vermin/vectors for disease, containment during transport, leakage during transport, environmental damage associated with a potential derailment, and quality of life issues for adjacent property owners. In addition to the proposed action, the draft EIS of July 2010 evaluated a No Action Alternative, a modified proposed action that would use an alternate route for a portion of the Western Segment, and a No-Build Alternative that would involve a local road system upgrade. The modified proposed action would entail continued use of RJCPs existing Wallaceton Subdivision line south of Wallaceton to a point near Philipsburg where a new connection would be built to another 5.8-mile abandoned rail line leading northeast to Munson (formerly referred to as the Philipsburg Industrial Track). Under either of the build alternatives, RJCP proposes to construct a single-track line on a 66-foot right-of-way over the 20-mile project length and to operate common carrier service over the line. At peak capacity, RJCP anticipates that it would serve the RRLLC development and other local shippers with one or at most two unit trains daily. The local road system upgrade alternative would involve improving the existing local road system to accommodate the anticipated volume of truck traffic generated by RRLLCs proposed development and interested shippers who would use the proposed rail line if it were available. This draft supplemental EIS addresses: 1) the potential impacts associated with RJCPs proposed transport of ethanol, a regulated hazardous material, over the rail line; 2) the change in the preliminary plan approval status of the No-Build Alternative (Black Rock Road upgrade); and 3) the results of the 2010 summer field survey for branching bur-reed. The modified proposed action is the environmentally preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide rail transportation service to RRLLC and several other shippers. The proposed rail line could keep up to 1,100 trucks per day off the local road system. The 25-mile-per-hour maximum operation speed would reduce the already extremely low probability of occurrence for a train accident resulting in release of ethanol. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Reactivation of the rail banked Eastern Segment would result in the loss of 9.3 miles of the Snow Shoe Multi-Use Rail Trail. Implementation of the modified proposed action would impact 3.4 acres of wetlands, cross five public roads and two private driveways, and create noise impacts to 32 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: National Trails System Act of 1968. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0482D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110072, 195 pages, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Health Hazards KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Roads KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Waste Management KW - Wetlands KW - Pennsylvania KW - National Trails System Act of 1968, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127023?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%29+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+JULY+2010%29.&rft.title=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%29+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+JULY+2010%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116) (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF JULY 2010). [Part 10 of 18] T2 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116) (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF JULY 2010). AN - 873127016; 14828-2_0010 AB - PURPOSE: The construction, operation, and reactivation of 20 miles of rail line in Clearfield and Centre counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. On May 20, 2008, R.J. Corman Railroad Company/Pennsylvania Lines Inc. (RJCP) filed a petition for an exemption from the prior approval requirements to construct and operate an abandoned 10.8-mile rail line between Wallaceton and Winburne in Clearfield County (the Western Segment) and to reactivate a connecting 9.3-mile portion of currently rail banked line between Winburne and Gorton in Clearfield and Centre Counties (the Eastern Segment). The proposed rail line would serve a new waste-to-ethanol facility, quarry, landfill, and industrial park currently being developed by Resource Recovery, LLC (RRLLC), near Gorton, Pennsylvania, as well as several other interested shippers. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to the proposed landfill, quarry, and industrial park development, and the planned transport of municipal solid waste by RJCP. Concerns include the potential for odors, vermin/vectors for disease, containment during transport, leakage during transport, environmental damage associated with a potential derailment, and quality of life issues for adjacent property owners. In addition to the proposed action, the draft EIS of July 2010 evaluated a No Action Alternative, a modified proposed action that would use an alternate route for a portion of the Western Segment, and a No-Build Alternative that would involve a local road system upgrade. The modified proposed action would entail continued use of RJCPs existing Wallaceton Subdivision line south of Wallaceton to a point near Philipsburg where a new connection would be built to another 5.8-mile abandoned rail line leading northeast to Munson (formerly referred to as the Philipsburg Industrial Track). Under either of the build alternatives, RJCP proposes to construct a single-track line on a 66-foot right-of-way over the 20-mile project length and to operate common carrier service over the line. At peak capacity, RJCP anticipates that it would serve the RRLLC development and other local shippers with one or at most two unit trains daily. The local road system upgrade alternative would involve improving the existing local road system to accommodate the anticipated volume of truck traffic generated by RRLLCs proposed development and interested shippers who would use the proposed rail line if it were available. This draft supplemental EIS addresses: 1) the potential impacts associated with RJCPs proposed transport of ethanol, a regulated hazardous material, over the rail line; 2) the change in the preliminary plan approval status of the No-Build Alternative (Black Rock Road upgrade); and 3) the results of the 2010 summer field survey for branching bur-reed. The modified proposed action is the environmentally preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide rail transportation service to RRLLC and several other shippers. The proposed rail line could keep up to 1,100 trucks per day off the local road system. The 25-mile-per-hour maximum operation speed would reduce the already extremely low probability of occurrence for a train accident resulting in release of ethanol. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Reactivation of the rail banked Eastern Segment would result in the loss of 9.3 miles of the Snow Shoe Multi-Use Rail Trail. Implementation of the modified proposed action would impact 3.4 acres of wetlands, cross five public roads and two private driveways, and create noise impacts to 32 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: National Trails System Act of 1968. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0482D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110072, 195 pages, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Health Hazards KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Roads KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Waste Management KW - Wetlands KW - Pennsylvania KW - National Trails System Act of 1968, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127016?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%29+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+JULY+2010%29.&rft.title=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%29+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+JULY+2010%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116) (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF JULY 2010). [Part 7 of 18] T2 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116) (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF JULY 2010). AN - 873127008; 14828-2_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The construction, operation, and reactivation of 20 miles of rail line in Clearfield and Centre counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. On May 20, 2008, R.J. Corman Railroad Company/Pennsylvania Lines Inc. (RJCP) filed a petition for an exemption from the prior approval requirements to construct and operate an abandoned 10.8-mile rail line between Wallaceton and Winburne in Clearfield County (the Western Segment) and to reactivate a connecting 9.3-mile portion of currently rail banked line between Winburne and Gorton in Clearfield and Centre Counties (the Eastern Segment). The proposed rail line would serve a new waste-to-ethanol facility, quarry, landfill, and industrial park currently being developed by Resource Recovery, LLC (RRLLC), near Gorton, Pennsylvania, as well as several other interested shippers. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to the proposed landfill, quarry, and industrial park development, and the planned transport of municipal solid waste by RJCP. Concerns include the potential for odors, vermin/vectors for disease, containment during transport, leakage during transport, environmental damage associated with a potential derailment, and quality of life issues for adjacent property owners. In addition to the proposed action, the draft EIS of July 2010 evaluated a No Action Alternative, a modified proposed action that would use an alternate route for a portion of the Western Segment, and a No-Build Alternative that would involve a local road system upgrade. The modified proposed action would entail continued use of RJCPs existing Wallaceton Subdivision line south of Wallaceton to a point near Philipsburg where a new connection would be built to another 5.8-mile abandoned rail line leading northeast to Munson (formerly referred to as the Philipsburg Industrial Track). Under either of the build alternatives, RJCP proposes to construct a single-track line on a 66-foot right-of-way over the 20-mile project length and to operate common carrier service over the line. At peak capacity, RJCP anticipates that it would serve the RRLLC development and other local shippers with one or at most two unit trains daily. The local road system upgrade alternative would involve improving the existing local road system to accommodate the anticipated volume of truck traffic generated by RRLLCs proposed development and interested shippers who would use the proposed rail line if it were available. This draft supplemental EIS addresses: 1) the potential impacts associated with RJCPs proposed transport of ethanol, a regulated hazardous material, over the rail line; 2) the change in the preliminary plan approval status of the No-Build Alternative (Black Rock Road upgrade); and 3) the results of the 2010 summer field survey for branching bur-reed. The modified proposed action is the environmentally preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide rail transportation service to RRLLC and several other shippers. The proposed rail line could keep up to 1,100 trucks per day off the local road system. The 25-mile-per-hour maximum operation speed would reduce the already extremely low probability of occurrence for a train accident resulting in release of ethanol. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Reactivation of the rail banked Eastern Segment would result in the loss of 9.3 miles of the Snow Shoe Multi-Use Rail Trail. Implementation of the modified proposed action would impact 3.4 acres of wetlands, cross five public roads and two private driveways, and create noise impacts to 32 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: National Trails System Act of 1968. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0482D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110072, 195 pages, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Health Hazards KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Roads KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Waste Management KW - Wetlands KW - Pennsylvania KW - National Trails System Act of 1968, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127008?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%29+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+JULY+2010%29.&rft.title=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%29+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+JULY+2010%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116) (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF JULY 2010). [Part 6 of 18] T2 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116) (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF JULY 2010). AN - 873127001; 14828-2_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The construction, operation, and reactivation of 20 miles of rail line in Clearfield and Centre counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. On May 20, 2008, R.J. Corman Railroad Company/Pennsylvania Lines Inc. (RJCP) filed a petition for an exemption from the prior approval requirements to construct and operate an abandoned 10.8-mile rail line between Wallaceton and Winburne in Clearfield County (the Western Segment) and to reactivate a connecting 9.3-mile portion of currently rail banked line between Winburne and Gorton in Clearfield and Centre Counties (the Eastern Segment). The proposed rail line would serve a new waste-to-ethanol facility, quarry, landfill, and industrial park currently being developed by Resource Recovery, LLC (RRLLC), near Gorton, Pennsylvania, as well as several other interested shippers. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to the proposed landfill, quarry, and industrial park development, and the planned transport of municipal solid waste by RJCP. Concerns include the potential for odors, vermin/vectors for disease, containment during transport, leakage during transport, environmental damage associated with a potential derailment, and quality of life issues for adjacent property owners. In addition to the proposed action, the draft EIS of July 2010 evaluated a No Action Alternative, a modified proposed action that would use an alternate route for a portion of the Western Segment, and a No-Build Alternative that would involve a local road system upgrade. The modified proposed action would entail continued use of RJCPs existing Wallaceton Subdivision line south of Wallaceton to a point near Philipsburg where a new connection would be built to another 5.8-mile abandoned rail line leading northeast to Munson (formerly referred to as the Philipsburg Industrial Track). Under either of the build alternatives, RJCP proposes to construct a single-track line on a 66-foot right-of-way over the 20-mile project length and to operate common carrier service over the line. At peak capacity, RJCP anticipates that it would serve the RRLLC development and other local shippers with one or at most two unit trains daily. The local road system upgrade alternative would involve improving the existing local road system to accommodate the anticipated volume of truck traffic generated by RRLLCs proposed development and interested shippers who would use the proposed rail line if it were available. This draft supplemental EIS addresses: 1) the potential impacts associated with RJCPs proposed transport of ethanol, a regulated hazardous material, over the rail line; 2) the change in the preliminary plan approval status of the No-Build Alternative (Black Rock Road upgrade); and 3) the results of the 2010 summer field survey for branching bur-reed. The modified proposed action is the environmentally preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide rail transportation service to RRLLC and several other shippers. The proposed rail line could keep up to 1,100 trucks per day off the local road system. The 25-mile-per-hour maximum operation speed would reduce the already extremely low probability of occurrence for a train accident resulting in release of ethanol. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Reactivation of the rail banked Eastern Segment would result in the loss of 9.3 miles of the Snow Shoe Multi-Use Rail Trail. Implementation of the modified proposed action would impact 3.4 acres of wetlands, cross five public roads and two private driveways, and create noise impacts to 32 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: National Trails System Act of 1968. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0482D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110072, 195 pages, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Health Hazards KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Roads KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Waste Management KW - Wetlands KW - Pennsylvania KW - National Trails System Act of 1968, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127001?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%29+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+JULY+2010%29.&rft.title=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%29+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+JULY+2010%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116) (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF JULY 2010). [Part 5 of 18] T2 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116) (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF JULY 2010). AN - 873126995; 14828-2_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The construction, operation, and reactivation of 20 miles of rail line in Clearfield and Centre counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. On May 20, 2008, R.J. Corman Railroad Company/Pennsylvania Lines Inc. (RJCP) filed a petition for an exemption from the prior approval requirements to construct and operate an abandoned 10.8-mile rail line between Wallaceton and Winburne in Clearfield County (the Western Segment) and to reactivate a connecting 9.3-mile portion of currently rail banked line between Winburne and Gorton in Clearfield and Centre Counties (the Eastern Segment). The proposed rail line would serve a new waste-to-ethanol facility, quarry, landfill, and industrial park currently being developed by Resource Recovery, LLC (RRLLC), near Gorton, Pennsylvania, as well as several other interested shippers. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to the proposed landfill, quarry, and industrial park development, and the planned transport of municipal solid waste by RJCP. Concerns include the potential for odors, vermin/vectors for disease, containment during transport, leakage during transport, environmental damage associated with a potential derailment, and quality of life issues for adjacent property owners. In addition to the proposed action, the draft EIS of July 2010 evaluated a No Action Alternative, a modified proposed action that would use an alternate route for a portion of the Western Segment, and a No-Build Alternative that would involve a local road system upgrade. The modified proposed action would entail continued use of RJCPs existing Wallaceton Subdivision line south of Wallaceton to a point near Philipsburg where a new connection would be built to another 5.8-mile abandoned rail line leading northeast to Munson (formerly referred to as the Philipsburg Industrial Track). Under either of the build alternatives, RJCP proposes to construct a single-track line on a 66-foot right-of-way over the 20-mile project length and to operate common carrier service over the line. At peak capacity, RJCP anticipates that it would serve the RRLLC development and other local shippers with one or at most two unit trains daily. The local road system upgrade alternative would involve improving the existing local road system to accommodate the anticipated volume of truck traffic generated by RRLLCs proposed development and interested shippers who would use the proposed rail line if it were available. This draft supplemental EIS addresses: 1) the potential impacts associated with RJCPs proposed transport of ethanol, a regulated hazardous material, over the rail line; 2) the change in the preliminary plan approval status of the No-Build Alternative (Black Rock Road upgrade); and 3) the results of the 2010 summer field survey for branching bur-reed. The modified proposed action is the environmentally preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide rail transportation service to RRLLC and several other shippers. The proposed rail line could keep up to 1,100 trucks per day off the local road system. The 25-mile-per-hour maximum operation speed would reduce the already extremely low probability of occurrence for a train accident resulting in release of ethanol. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Reactivation of the rail banked Eastern Segment would result in the loss of 9.3 miles of the Snow Shoe Multi-Use Rail Trail. Implementation of the modified proposed action would impact 3.4 acres of wetlands, cross five public roads and two private driveways, and create noise impacts to 32 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: National Trails System Act of 1968. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0482D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110072, 195 pages, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Health Hazards KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Roads KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Waste Management KW - Wetlands KW - Pennsylvania KW - National Trails System Act of 1968, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126995?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%29+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+JULY+2010%29.&rft.title=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%29+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+JULY+2010%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116) (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF JULY 2010). [Part 4 of 18] T2 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116) (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF JULY 2010). AN - 873126988; 14828-2_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The construction, operation, and reactivation of 20 miles of rail line in Clearfield and Centre counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. On May 20, 2008, R.J. Corman Railroad Company/Pennsylvania Lines Inc. (RJCP) filed a petition for an exemption from the prior approval requirements to construct and operate an abandoned 10.8-mile rail line between Wallaceton and Winburne in Clearfield County (the Western Segment) and to reactivate a connecting 9.3-mile portion of currently rail banked line between Winburne and Gorton in Clearfield and Centre Counties (the Eastern Segment). The proposed rail line would serve a new waste-to-ethanol facility, quarry, landfill, and industrial park currently being developed by Resource Recovery, LLC (RRLLC), near Gorton, Pennsylvania, as well as several other interested shippers. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to the proposed landfill, quarry, and industrial park development, and the planned transport of municipal solid waste by RJCP. Concerns include the potential for odors, vermin/vectors for disease, containment during transport, leakage during transport, environmental damage associated with a potential derailment, and quality of life issues for adjacent property owners. In addition to the proposed action, the draft EIS of July 2010 evaluated a No Action Alternative, a modified proposed action that would use an alternate route for a portion of the Western Segment, and a No-Build Alternative that would involve a local road system upgrade. The modified proposed action would entail continued use of RJCPs existing Wallaceton Subdivision line south of Wallaceton to a point near Philipsburg where a new connection would be built to another 5.8-mile abandoned rail line leading northeast to Munson (formerly referred to as the Philipsburg Industrial Track). Under either of the build alternatives, RJCP proposes to construct a single-track line on a 66-foot right-of-way over the 20-mile project length and to operate common carrier service over the line. At peak capacity, RJCP anticipates that it would serve the RRLLC development and other local shippers with one or at most two unit trains daily. The local road system upgrade alternative would involve improving the existing local road system to accommodate the anticipated volume of truck traffic generated by RRLLCs proposed development and interested shippers who would use the proposed rail line if it were available. This draft supplemental EIS addresses: 1) the potential impacts associated with RJCPs proposed transport of ethanol, a regulated hazardous material, over the rail line; 2) the change in the preliminary plan approval status of the No-Build Alternative (Black Rock Road upgrade); and 3) the results of the 2010 summer field survey for branching bur-reed. The modified proposed action is the environmentally preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide rail transportation service to RRLLC and several other shippers. The proposed rail line could keep up to 1,100 trucks per day off the local road system. The 25-mile-per-hour maximum operation speed would reduce the already extremely low probability of occurrence for a train accident resulting in release of ethanol. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Reactivation of the rail banked Eastern Segment would result in the loss of 9.3 miles of the Snow Shoe Multi-Use Rail Trail. Implementation of the modified proposed action would impact 3.4 acres of wetlands, cross five public roads and two private driveways, and create noise impacts to 32 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: National Trails System Act of 1968. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0482D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110072, 195 pages, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Health Hazards KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Roads KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Waste Management KW - Wetlands KW - Pennsylvania KW - National Trails System Act of 1968, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126988?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%29+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+JULY+2010%29.&rft.title=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%29+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+JULY+2010%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116) (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF JULY 2010). [Part 3 of 18] T2 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116) (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF JULY 2010). AN - 873126981; 14828-2_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The construction, operation, and reactivation of 20 miles of rail line in Clearfield and Centre counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. On May 20, 2008, R.J. Corman Railroad Company/Pennsylvania Lines Inc. (RJCP) filed a petition for an exemption from the prior approval requirements to construct and operate an abandoned 10.8-mile rail line between Wallaceton and Winburne in Clearfield County (the Western Segment) and to reactivate a connecting 9.3-mile portion of currently rail banked line between Winburne and Gorton in Clearfield and Centre Counties (the Eastern Segment). The proposed rail line would serve a new waste-to-ethanol facility, quarry, landfill, and industrial park currently being developed by Resource Recovery, LLC (RRLLC), near Gorton, Pennsylvania, as well as several other interested shippers. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to the proposed landfill, quarry, and industrial park development, and the planned transport of municipal solid waste by RJCP. Concerns include the potential for odors, vermin/vectors for disease, containment during transport, leakage during transport, environmental damage associated with a potential derailment, and quality of life issues for adjacent property owners. In addition to the proposed action, the draft EIS of July 2010 evaluated a No Action Alternative, a modified proposed action that would use an alternate route for a portion of the Western Segment, and a No-Build Alternative that would involve a local road system upgrade. The modified proposed action would entail continued use of RJCPs existing Wallaceton Subdivision line south of Wallaceton to a point near Philipsburg where a new connection would be built to another 5.8-mile abandoned rail line leading northeast to Munson (formerly referred to as the Philipsburg Industrial Track). Under either of the build alternatives, RJCP proposes to construct a single-track line on a 66-foot right-of-way over the 20-mile project length and to operate common carrier service over the line. At peak capacity, RJCP anticipates that it would serve the RRLLC development and other local shippers with one or at most two unit trains daily. The local road system upgrade alternative would involve improving the existing local road system to accommodate the anticipated volume of truck traffic generated by RRLLCs proposed development and interested shippers who would use the proposed rail line if it were available. This draft supplemental EIS addresses: 1) the potential impacts associated with RJCPs proposed transport of ethanol, a regulated hazardous material, over the rail line; 2) the change in the preliminary plan approval status of the No-Build Alternative (Black Rock Road upgrade); and 3) the results of the 2010 summer field survey for branching bur-reed. The modified proposed action is the environmentally preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide rail transportation service to RRLLC and several other shippers. The proposed rail line could keep up to 1,100 trucks per day off the local road system. The 25-mile-per-hour maximum operation speed would reduce the already extremely low probability of occurrence for a train accident resulting in release of ethanol. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Reactivation of the rail banked Eastern Segment would result in the loss of 9.3 miles of the Snow Shoe Multi-Use Rail Trail. Implementation of the modified proposed action would impact 3.4 acres of wetlands, cross five public roads and two private driveways, and create noise impacts to 32 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: National Trails System Act of 1968. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0482D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110072, 195 pages, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Health Hazards KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Roads KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Waste Management KW - Wetlands KW - Pennsylvania KW - National Trails System Act of 1968, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126981?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%29+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+JULY+2010%29.&rft.title=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%29+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+JULY+2010%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 1 of 39] T2 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873126656; 14829-3_0001 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements along the 144-mile-long Interstate 70 (I-70) Mountain Corridor between Glenwood Springs and State Route 470 (C-470), Garfield, Eagle, Summit, Clear Creek and Jefferson counties, Colorado are proposed. The I-70 highway is the only east-west interstate to cross Colorado, directly serves more than 20 communities and a number of major ski resorts, provides access to the White River National Forest and the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests, and is an important freight corridor. Population growth in the Corridor and in the Denver metropolitan area has increased traffic volumes and recreational travelers currently experience substantial delays on weekends and holidays on the eastern side of the corridor while the western side experiences work trip delays during the week. This project began in 2000 and a revised programmatic draft EIS was issued in 2004. Twenty-one action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this first tier programmatic final EIS. The preferred alternative consists of near-term and general long-term improvements for the Corridor to meet the travel demand for 2050 and address immediate Corridor needs. To address future uncertainties, trigger points and stakeholder involvement would be used to reassess needs and to determine the most appropriate transportation improvements to meet future demand. The preferred alternative would implement a multimodal solution and include non-infrastructure related components, an advanced guideway system, and highway improvements. A specific advanced guideway system technology would be determined in subsequent study or a Tier 2 process and would be deployed to provide transit service from the Eagle County Regional Airport to C-470, a distance of 118 miles. It would be a fully elevated transit system on two tracks aligned to the north, south, or in the median of I-70. The system would connect to the regional transportation district network in Jefferson County and local and regional transit services at most of the 15 proposed transit stations along the route. The advanced guideway system would require new tunnel bores at both the Eisenhower-Johnson Memorial Tunnels and the Twin Tunnels. The six-lane highway widening improvements included with the preferred alternative maximum program have both 55 miles per hour (mph) and 65 mph design options. The 55 mph option would use the existing I-70 alignment. The 65 mph design would require additional tunnels at Dowd Canyon, Hidden Valley, and Floyd Hill. At Dowd Canyon, two tunnels would be required for eastbound and westbound traffic. The preferred alternative identifies a minimum and maximum range of multi-modal improvements ranging in cost from $16.1 billion to $20.2 billion estimated in year of expenditure dollars and assuming the mid year of construction for the whole alternative is 2025. The 21 action alternatives evaluated in this document range in cost from $1.9 billion to $20.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would increase capacity, improve accessibility and mobility, and decrease congestion for travel demand to destinations along the I-70 Mountain Corridor as well as for interstate travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Automobile and truck traffic would continue to degrade air quality, displace key wildlife habitat, and impede and endanger wildlife movements. Contamination from vehicles which then is washed into nearby streams would impact water quality. Under the preferred alternative, the increase in runoff would range from 16 percent to 24 percent. Removal, modification or disturbance of habitat for aquatic species would occur. Historic resources that could be affected include several nationally significant properties, including the Georgetown-Silver Plume National Historic Landmark District and as many as 75 different historic properties. Geologic hazards would need careful examination during Tier 2 processes to locate and design improvements to minimize effects. The preferred alternative would affect between 65 and 90 recreation sites. Transportation energy consumption would increase significantly, particularly under modal options involving highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the original and revised draft EISs, see 05-0396D, Volume 29, Number 3 and 10-0498D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110073, Final EIS--527 pages, Appendices--855 pages, Technical Reports--6 volumes, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Biologic Surveys KW - Cost Assessments KW - Energy Consumption KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Indian Reservations KW - Paleontological Sites KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126656?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=34&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=718&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Journal+of+Psychoeducational+Assessment&rft.issn=07342829&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177%2F0734282916651382 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116) (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF JULY 2010). [Part 18 of 18] T2 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116) (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF JULY 2010). AN - 873126649; 14828-2_0018 AB - PURPOSE: The construction, operation, and reactivation of 20 miles of rail line in Clearfield and Centre counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. On May 20, 2008, R.J. Corman Railroad Company/Pennsylvania Lines Inc. (RJCP) filed a petition for an exemption from the prior approval requirements to construct and operate an abandoned 10.8-mile rail line between Wallaceton and Winburne in Clearfield County (the Western Segment) and to reactivate a connecting 9.3-mile portion of currently rail banked line between Winburne and Gorton in Clearfield and Centre Counties (the Eastern Segment). The proposed rail line would serve a new waste-to-ethanol facility, quarry, landfill, and industrial park currently being developed by Resource Recovery, LLC (RRLLC), near Gorton, Pennsylvania, as well as several other interested shippers. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to the proposed landfill, quarry, and industrial park development, and the planned transport of municipal solid waste by RJCP. Concerns include the potential for odors, vermin/vectors for disease, containment during transport, leakage during transport, environmental damage associated with a potential derailment, and quality of life issues for adjacent property owners. In addition to the proposed action, the draft EIS of July 2010 evaluated a No Action Alternative, a modified proposed action that would use an alternate route for a portion of the Western Segment, and a No-Build Alternative that would involve a local road system upgrade. The modified proposed action would entail continued use of RJCPs existing Wallaceton Subdivision line south of Wallaceton to a point near Philipsburg where a new connection would be built to another 5.8-mile abandoned rail line leading northeast to Munson (formerly referred to as the Philipsburg Industrial Track). Under either of the build alternatives, RJCP proposes to construct a single-track line on a 66-foot right-of-way over the 20-mile project length and to operate common carrier service over the line. At peak capacity, RJCP anticipates that it would serve the RRLLC development and other local shippers with one or at most two unit trains daily. The local road system upgrade alternative would involve improving the existing local road system to accommodate the anticipated volume of truck traffic generated by RRLLCs proposed development and interested shippers who would use the proposed rail line if it were available. This draft supplemental EIS addresses: 1) the potential impacts associated with RJCPs proposed transport of ethanol, a regulated hazardous material, over the rail line; 2) the change in the preliminary plan approval status of the No-Build Alternative (Black Rock Road upgrade); and 3) the results of the 2010 summer field survey for branching bur-reed. The modified proposed action is the environmentally preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide rail transportation service to RRLLC and several other shippers. The proposed rail line could keep up to 1,100 trucks per day off the local road system. The 25-mile-per-hour maximum operation speed would reduce the already extremely low probability of occurrence for a train accident resulting in release of ethanol. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Reactivation of the rail banked Eastern Segment would result in the loss of 9.3 miles of the Snow Shoe Multi-Use Rail Trail. Implementation of the modified proposed action would impact 3.4 acres of wetlands, cross five public roads and two private driveways, and create noise impacts to 32 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: National Trails System Act of 1968. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0482D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110072, 195 pages, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 18 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Health Hazards KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Roads KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Waste Management KW - Wetlands KW - Pennsylvania KW - National Trails System Act of 1968, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126649?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%29+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+JULY+2010%29.&rft.title=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%29+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+JULY+2010%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116) (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF JULY 2010). AN - 860869117; 14828 AB - PURPOSE: The construction, operation, and reactivation of 20 miles of rail line in Clearfield and Centre counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. On May 20, 2008, R.J. Corman Railroad Company/Pennsylvania Lines Inc. (RJCP) filed a petition for an exemption from the prior approval requirements to construct and operate an abandoned 10.8-mile rail line between Wallaceton and Winburne in Clearfield County (the Western Segment) and to reactivate a connecting 9.3-mile portion of currently rail banked line between Winburne and Gorton in Clearfield and Centre Counties (the Eastern Segment). The proposed rail line would serve a new waste-to-ethanol facility, quarry, landfill, and industrial park currently being developed by Resource Recovery, LLC (RRLLC), near Gorton, Pennsylvania, as well as several other interested shippers. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to the proposed landfill, quarry, and industrial park development, and the planned transport of municipal solid waste by RJCP. Concerns include the potential for odors, vermin/vectors for disease, containment during transport, leakage during transport, environmental damage associated with a potential derailment, and quality of life issues for adjacent property owners. In addition to the proposed action, the draft EIS of July 2010 evaluated a No Action Alternative, a modified proposed action that would use an alternate route for a portion of the Western Segment, and a No-Build Alternative that would involve a local road system upgrade. The modified proposed action would entail continued use of RJCPs existing Wallaceton Subdivision line south of Wallaceton to a point near Philipsburg where a new connection would be built to another 5.8-mile abandoned rail line leading northeast to Munson (formerly referred to as the Philipsburg Industrial Track). Under either of the build alternatives, RJCP proposes to construct a single-track line on a 66-foot right-of-way over the 20-mile project length and to operate common carrier service over the line. At peak capacity, RJCP anticipates that it would serve the RRLLC development and other local shippers with one or at most two unit trains daily. The local road system upgrade alternative would involve improving the existing local road system to accommodate the anticipated volume of truck traffic generated by RRLLCs proposed development and interested shippers who would use the proposed rail line if it were available. This draft supplemental EIS addresses: 1) the potential impacts associated with RJCPs proposed transport of ethanol, a regulated hazardous material, over the rail line; 2) the change in the preliminary plan approval status of the No-Build Alternative (Black Rock Road upgrade); and 3) the results of the 2010 summer field survey for branching bur-reed. The modified proposed action is the environmentally preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide rail transportation service to RRLLC and several other shippers. The proposed rail line could keep up to 1,100 trucks per day off the local road system. The 25-mile-per-hour maximum operation speed would reduce the already extremely low probability of occurrence for a train accident resulting in release of ethanol. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Reactivation of the rail banked Eastern Segment would result in the loss of 9.3 miles of the Snow Shoe Multi-Use Rail Trail. Implementation of the modified proposed action would impact 3.4 acres of wetlands, cross five public roads and two private driveways, and create noise impacts to 32 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: National Trails System Act of 1968. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0482D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110072, 195 pages, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Health Hazards KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Roads KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Waste Management KW - Wetlands KW - Pennsylvania KW - National Trails System Act of 1968, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/860869117?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%29+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+JULY+2010%29.&rft.title=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%29+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+JULY+2010%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 860868978; 14829 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements along the 144-mile-long Interstate 70 (I-70) Mountain Corridor between Glenwood Springs and State Route 470 (C-470), Garfield, Eagle, Summit, Clear Creek and Jefferson counties, Colorado are proposed. The I-70 highway is the only east-west interstate to cross Colorado, directly serves more than 20 communities and a number of major ski resorts, provides access to the White River National Forest and the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests, and is an important freight corridor. Population growth in the Corridor and in the Denver metropolitan area has increased traffic volumes and recreational travelers currently experience substantial delays on weekends and holidays on the eastern side of the corridor while the western side experiences work trip delays during the week. This project began in 2000 and a revised programmatic draft EIS was issued in 2004. Twenty-one action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this first tier programmatic final EIS. The preferred alternative consists of near-term and general long-term improvements for the Corridor to meet the travel demand for 2050 and address immediate Corridor needs. To address future uncertainties, trigger points and stakeholder involvement would be used to reassess needs and to determine the most appropriate transportation improvements to meet future demand. The preferred alternative would implement a multimodal solution and include non-infrastructure related components, an advanced guideway system, and highway improvements. A specific advanced guideway system technology would be determined in subsequent study or a Tier 2 process and would be deployed to provide transit service from the Eagle County Regional Airport to C-470, a distance of 118 miles. It would be a fully elevated transit system on two tracks aligned to the north, south, or in the median of I-70. The system would connect to the regional transportation district network in Jefferson County and local and regional transit services at most of the 15 proposed transit stations along the route. The advanced guideway system would require new tunnel bores at both the Eisenhower-Johnson Memorial Tunnels and the Twin Tunnels. The six-lane highway widening improvements included with the preferred alternative maximum program have both 55 miles per hour (mph) and 65 mph design options. The 55 mph option would use the existing I-70 alignment. The 65 mph design would require additional tunnels at Dowd Canyon, Hidden Valley, and Floyd Hill. At Dowd Canyon, two tunnels would be required for eastbound and westbound traffic. The preferred alternative identifies a minimum and maximum range of multi-modal improvements ranging in cost from $16.1 billion to $20.2 billion estimated in year of expenditure dollars and assuming the mid year of construction for the whole alternative is 2025. The 21 action alternatives evaluated in this document range in cost from $1.9 billion to $20.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would increase capacity, improve accessibility and mobility, and decrease congestion for travel demand to destinations along the I-70 Mountain Corridor as well as for interstate travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Automobile and truck traffic would continue to degrade air quality, displace key wildlife habitat, and impede and endanger wildlife movements. Contamination from vehicles which then is washed into nearby streams would impact water quality. Under the preferred alternative, the increase in runoff would range from 16 percent to 24 percent. Removal, modification or disturbance of habitat for aquatic species would occur. Historic resources that could be affected include several nationally significant properties, including the Georgetown-Silver Plume National Historic Landmark District and as many as 75 different historic properties. Geologic hazards would need careful examination during Tier 2 processes to locate and design improvements to minimize effects. The preferred alternative would affect between 65 and 90 recreation sites. Transportation energy consumption would increase significantly, particularly under modal options involving highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the original and revised draft EISs, see 05-0396D, Volume 29, Number 3 and 10-0498D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110073, Final EIS--527 pages, Appendices--855 pages, Technical Reports--6 volumes, March 11, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Biologic Surveys KW - Cost Assessments KW - Energy Consumption KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Indian Reservations KW - Paleontological Sites KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/860868978?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH SECOND STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, FROM INTERSTATE 40 AT NORTH SECOND STREET TO THE INTERSECTION OF U.S. 51/SR-3/WHITNEY AVENUE IN MEMPHIS, SHELBY COUNTY, TENNESSEE. AN - 15236699; 14821 AB - PURPOSE: The improvement of the North Second Street corridor between neighborhoods north of Memphis, Tennessee and downtown and the central business district is proposed. U.S. 51/SR-3, a four-lane route located one mile east of the Mississippi River and one mile west of Interstate 40 (I-40), is the primary north-south arterial corridor in north Memphis and it frequently experiences congestion during peak travel times. North Second Street is the most logical corridor between U.S. 51/SR-3 and the Mississippi River to provide secondary access. Most of North Second Street currently has two travel lanes and is functionally classified as an urban principal arterial on the National Highway System. The street does not meet current design standards in several locations and does not have the capacity to meet future traffic projections. The proposed action and a No Build Alternative are evaluated in this draft EIS. Under the build alternative, North Second and North Third streets would be converted from two-way streets into a one-way pair from I-40 to Chelsea Avenue. North Second would be one-way south and North Third would be one-way north. Both would have three traffic lanes from I-40 to Auction Avenue at which point they would transition to two traffic lanes before continuing to Chelsea Avenue. All construction along this first segment would be within existing right-of-way. Beginning at Chelsea Avenue, the alignments would diverge until rejoining just north of Henry Avenue to form a two directional four-lane roadway that would extend along existing North Second Street to the south side of the Wolf River. A new two-lane bridge would be constructed parallel to the existing two-lane bridge. The proposed alignment would extend north on new location and tie into existing Whitney Avenue. This rural segment would consist of two traffic lanes in each direction separated by a 30-foot median with 10-foot shoulders. The final segment would extend along Whitney Avenue to the end of the project at the intersection of Whitney and U.S. 51/SR-3. Total project costs are estimated at $92.9 million in 2015 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvements would provide viable secondary access into the central business district of Memphis, relieve traffic congestion and reduce delays on U.S. 51/Danny Thomas Boulevard and I-40, and enhance the ongoing redevelopment of the Uptown neighborhood and other older residential areas. Construction would provide sidewalks and bicycle lanes and access to the proposed Wolf River Greenway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities would cause temporary traffic delays, noise, and dust. New right-of-way would convert 11.3 acres of forested habitat and 15 acres of farmland, cross streams, and fill an estimated seven acres of wetlands in the Wolf River floodplain. Thirteen households and 11 businesses along the corridor would be displaced. Two properties which are eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places would be impacted. Building demolition could encounter friable asbestos. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110065, 327 pages, March 4, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Central Business Districts KW - Demolition KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Urban Renewal KW - Wetlands KW - Tennessee KW - Wolf River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/15236699?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-03-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+SECOND+STREET+CORRIDOR+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT%2C+FROM+INTERSTATE+40+AT+NORTH+SECOND+STREET+TO+THE+INTERSECTION+OF+U.S.+51%2FSR-3%2FWHITNEY+AVENUE+IN+MEMPHIS%2C+SHELBY+COUNTY%2C+TENNESSEE.&rft.title=NORTH+SECOND+STREET+CORRIDOR+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT%2C+FROM+INTERSTATE+40+AT+NORTH+SECOND+STREET+TO+THE+INTERSECTION+OF+U.S.+51%2FSR-3%2FWHITNEY+AVENUE+IN+MEMPHIS%2C+SHELBY+COUNTY%2C+TENNESSEE.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Nashville, Tennessee; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - The Screening of Forensic Blood, Urine, and Tissue Specimens for Xenobiotics Using Ion-Trap Liquid Chromatography-Tandem Mass Spectrometry AN - 902376530; 15813571 AB - During the investigation of aviation accidents, postmortem specimens from accident victims including blood, urine, and tissue are submitted to the Federal Aviation Administration's Civil Aerospace Medical Institute (CAMI) for toxicological analysis. The first, and perhaps most important, step in the analysis process is the initial screening of biological specimens for illicit, medically prescribed, and over-the-counter compounds that may be present and potentially be a cause and/or factor in the accident. Currently, our general unknown screening (GUS) procedure involves, in part, both gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) and liquid chromatography (LC) with both diode-array detection (DAD) and fluorescence detection. Both GC and LC techniques have inherent limitations that prevent the detection of certain types of compounds. The decreased specificity and sensitivity of LC-DAD has been an impediment to the existing GUS procedure. Therefore, our laboratory set out to develop and validate an LC-MS-MS procedure that is superior to LC-DAD. The limits of detection of 359 forensically important xenobiotics have been established following solid-phase extraction from whole blood and analysis by LC-MS-MS. Although whole blood was used as the matrix during instrument validation, the method has been successfully applied to both forensic urine and tissue specimens as well. JF - Journal of Analytical Toxicology AU - Johnson, Robert D AU - Botch, Sabra R AD - Federal Aviation Administration, Civil Aerospace Medical Institute, Bioaeronautical Sciences Research Laboratory, AAM-610, CAMI Building, RM 356, 6500 S. MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73169-6901, r.d.johnson@faa.gov Y1 - 2011/03// PY - 2011 DA - Mar 2011 SP - 65 EP - 74 PB - Preston Publications, Inc., 6600 W. Touhy Ave. Niles IL 60714 United States VL - 35 IS - 2 SN - 0146-4760, 0146-4760 KW - Toxicology Abstracts KW - Blood KW - Accidents KW - Fluorescence KW - Urine KW - Liquid chromatography KW - Gas chromatography KW - Forensic science KW - Xenobiotics KW - Mass spectroscopy KW - X 24300:Methods UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/902376530?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Atoxicologyabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Journal+of+Analytical+Toxicology&rft.atitle=The+Screening+of+Forensic+Blood%2C+Urine%2C+and+Tissue+Specimens+for+Xenobiotics+Using+Ion-Trap+Liquid+Chromatography-Tandem+Mass+Spectrometry&rft.au=Johnson%2C+Robert+D%3BBotch%2C+Sabra+R&rft.aulast=Johnson&rft.aufirst=Robert&rft.date=2011-03-01&rft.volume=35&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=65&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Journal+of+Analytical+Toxicology&rft.issn=01464760&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/pres/jat/2011/00000035/00000002/art00001 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-29 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Blood; Accidents; Fluorescence; Gas chromatography; Liquid chromatography; Urine; Forensic science; Xenobiotics; Mass spectroscopy ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Landslides in the vicinity of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania AN - 868009542; 2011-046239 AB - The Pittsburgh region has long been recognized as one of major landslide activity. This results from the geology and geomorphic processes shaping the region. The underlying bedrock of flat-lying interbedded strong and weak sedimentary strata has been acted upon by erosion, stress relief, and mass wasting, including creep and landsliding processes, to produce masses of marginally stable colluvial rock and soil on many of the steep hillsides common to the region. Landsliding often involves re-activation of such rock and soil masses. Recent landsliding is often triggered by heavy precipitation and by human activities, i.e., slope excavation, fill placement, and changes in long-established patterns of surface and subsurface drainage. This field trip has four stops, all within 20 mi of downtown Pittsburgh. Each stop is along a transportation corridor (railroad, local road, and two along an interstate highway). Each stop has various sized examples of the types of landslides common to the region. Most of these examples involve reactivation of unrecognized colluvial landslide masses. JF - GSA Field Guide AU - Gray, Richard E AU - Hamel, James V AU - Adams, William R, Jr A2 - Ruffolo, Richard M. A2 - Ciampaglio, Charles N. Y1 - 2011/03// PY - 2011 DA - March 2011 SP - 61 EP - 85 PB - Geological Society of America, Boulder, CO VL - 20 KW - United States KW - lithostratigraphy KW - geologic hazards KW - colluvium KW - clastic sediments KW - field trips KW - road log KW - Mount Washington KW - lithofacies KW - landslides KW - Allegheny County Pennsylvania KW - mass movements KW - sediments KW - natural hazards KW - Pennsylvania KW - Pittsburgh Pennsylvania KW - 22:Environmental geology UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868009542?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ageorefmodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=GSA+Field+Guide&rft.atitle=Landslides+in+the+vicinity+of+Pittsburgh%2C+Pennsylvania&rft.au=Gray%2C+Richard+E%3BHamel%2C+James+V%3BAdams%2C+William+R%2C+Jr&rft.aulast=Gray&rft.aufirst=Richard&rft.date=2011-03-01&rft.volume=20&rft.issue=&rft.spage=61&rft.isbn=9780813700205&rft.btitle=&rft.title=GSA+Field+Guide&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/10.1130%2F2011.0020%2804%29 L2 - http://fieldguides.gsapubs.org/content/by/year LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2012, American Geosciences Institute. Reference includes data supplied by the Geological Society of America, Boulder, CO, United States N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - Number of references - 60 N1 - PubXState - CO N1 - Document feature - illus. incl. sects., strat. cols., geol. sketch maps N1 - Last updated - 2012-06-07 N1 - CODEN - #05176 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Allegheny County Pennsylvania; clastic sediments; colluvium; field trips; geologic hazards; landslides; lithofacies; lithostratigraphy; mass movements; Mount Washington; natural hazards; Pennsylvania; Pittsburgh Pennsylvania; road log; sediments; United States DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1130/2011.0020(04) ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Urban rail systems investments: an analysis of the impacts on property values and residents' location AN - 864443965; 14440263 AB - Light rail, metro and other urban rail transit systems can play a significant role in improving the attractiveness and quality of urban public transport. They can influence the attractiveness of locations near the stations and improve accessibility for these locations. Furthermore urban rail can improve a location's attractiveness by its image effect: it makes a station appear modern and dynamic, and thus raises the status of this location. This paper summarises findings on the land-use and economic impacts of the urban rail system of the city of Naples over time and space. It examines changes in residential and non-residential (offices and retail) property prices around the newly built stations between 2001 and 2008 as well as the changes in the number of residents for the same station catchment areas. Ad hoc station control areas have been specified in order to compare the results of these changes. Results show that values in station control areas are lower than those of those of the stations catchment areas. JF - Journal of Transport Geography AU - Pagliara, Francesca AU - Papa, Enrica AD - Department of Transportation Engineering, University of Naples Federico, via Claudio 21, 80125 Naples, Italy Y1 - 2011/03// PY - 2011 DA - March 2011 SP - 200 EP - 211 PB - Elsevier Science, The Boulevard Kidlington Oxford OX5 1GB UK VL - 19 IS - 2 SN - 0966-6923, 0966-6923 KW - Environment Abstracts KW - Urban rail systems KW - Residents' location KW - Property value change KW - Economics KW - Catchments KW - real estate KW - Geography KW - Land use KW - Urban areas KW - ENA 07:General UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/864443965?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aenvabstractsmodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Journal+of+Transport+Geography&rft.atitle=Urban+rail+systems+investments%3A+an+analysis+of+the+impacts+on+property+values+and+residents%27+location&rft.au=Pagliara%2C+Francesca%3BPapa%2C+Enrica&rft.aulast=Pagliara&rft.aufirst=Francesca&rft.date=2011-03-01&rft.volume=19&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=200&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Journal+of+Transport+Geography&rft.issn=09666923&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016%2Fj.jtrangeo.2010.02.006 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-01-01 N1 - Last updated - 2016-03-17 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Economics; Catchments; real estate; Geography; Land use; Urban areas DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2010.02.006 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Managing passenger behavioral intention: an integrated framework for service quality, satisfaction, perceived value, and switching barriers AN - 864410801; 14379402 AB - This paper seeks to improve our understanding of passengers' behavioral intention by proposing an integrated framework from the attitudinal perspective. According to the literature in marketing research, we establish a causal relationship model that considers "service quality-satisfaction-behavioral intentions" paradigm, perceived value theory, and switching barrier theory. Exploring passengers' behavioral intention from satisfaction and perceived value help to understand how passengers are attracted by the company, while switching barriers assist in realizing how passengers are "locked" into a relationship with the current company. Furthermore, in order to capture the nature of service quality, we adopt a hierarchical factor structure which serves service quality as the higher-order factor. In this study, coach industry is selected as our research subject. The empirical results, as hypothesized, show that all causal relationships are statistically significant, and perceived value us the most important predictor of satisfaction and passengers' behavioral intention. In conclusion, the managerial implications and suggestions for future research are discussed. JF - Transportation AU - Jen, William AU - Tu, Rungting AU - Lu, Tim AD - Department of Transportation Technology and Management, National Chiao Tung University, 1001, Ta Hsueh Road, East Dist, Hsinchu, 30010, Taiwan Y1 - 2011/03// PY - 2011 DA - Mar 2011 SP - 321 EP - 342 PB - Springer-Verlag, Tiergartenstrasse 17 Heidelberg 69121 Germany VL - 38 IS - 2 SN - 0049-4488, 0049-4488 KW - Environment Abstracts KW - Transportation KW - Perception KW - marketing KW - attitudes KW - ENA 18:Transportation UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/864410801?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aenvabstractsmodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation&rft.atitle=Managing+passenger+behavioral+intention%3A+an+integrated+framework+for+service+quality%2C+satisfaction%2C+perceived+value%2C+and+switching+barriers&rft.au=Jen%2C+William%3BTu%2C+Rungting%3BLu%2C+Tim&rft.aulast=Jen&rft.aufirst=William&rft.date=2011-03-01&rft.volume=38&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=321&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation&rft.issn=00494488&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007%2Fs11116-010-9306-9 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-01-01 N1 - Last updated - 2015-03-19 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Transportation; marketing; Perception; attitudes DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11116-010-9306-9 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Numerical analysis of permafrost effects on the seismic site response AN - 1784734635; 2016-034947 AB - Some of the damage to the infrastructure observed in past earthquakes occurred in Alaska could be related to the existence of permafrost. However, only limited research has been carried out so far to investigate the effects of permafrost on the seismic site response. Permafrost with relatively high shear wave velocity (1000-1500m/s) extensively exists in the interior of Alaska and causes anomaly in the shear wave velocity profile that may alter the site response. In current design practices, permafrost has been treated as bedrock and its potential effects on site response are ignored. A systematic investigation was conducted to understand the effects of permafrost on the ground motion characteristics using one-dimensional equivalent linear analysis for the MCE, AASHTO and IBC Design Earthquake level hazards. The average surface displacement, velocity and acceleration response spectra for a typical permafrost site were obtained and the worst case scenario was identified. The results show that the presence of permafrost can significantly alter the ground motion characteristics and it may not be conservative to ignore the effects of permafrost in the seismic design of civil structures. Abstract Copyright (2011) Elsevier, B.V. JF - Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering (1984) AU - Yang, Zhaohui AU - Dutta, Utpal AU - Xu, Gang AU - Hazirbaba, Kenan AU - Marx, Elmer E Y1 - 2011/03// PY - 2011 DA - March 2011 SP - 282 EP - 290 PB - Elsevier, Southampton VL - 31 IS - 3 SN - 0267-7261, 0267-7261 KW - United States KW - permafrost KW - geologic hazards KW - acceleration KW - elastic waves KW - seismic response KW - attenuation KW - quantitative analysis KW - seismic risk KW - velocity KW - probability KW - bridges KW - Fairbanks Alaska KW - body waves KW - soil profiles KW - numerical analysis KW - statistical analysis KW - damage KW - strong motion KW - natural hazards KW - ground motion KW - Alaska KW - seismic waves KW - infrastructure KW - earthquakes KW - S-waves KW - design KW - Goldstream Creek KW - 19:Seismology UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1784734635?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ageorefmodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Soil+Dynamics+and+Earthquake+Engineering+%281984%29&rft.atitle=Numerical+analysis+of+permafrost+effects+on+the+seismic+site+response&rft.au=Yang%2C+Zhaohui%3BDutta%2C+Utpal%3BXu%2C+Gang%3BHazirbaba%2C+Kenan%3BMarx%2C+Elmer+E&rft.aulast=Yang&rft.aufirst=Zhaohui&rft.date=2011-03-01&rft.volume=31&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=282&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Soil+Dynamics+and+Earthquake+Engineering+%281984%29&rft.issn=02677261&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016%2Fj.soildyn.2010.08.004 LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2016, American Geosciences Institute. Reference includes data from CAPCAS, Elsevier Scientific Publishers, Amsterdam, Netherlands N1 - Date revised - 2016-01-01 N1 - Number of references - 35 N1 - Document feature - illus. incl. 2 tables N1 - Last updated - 2016-04-28 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - acceleration; Alaska; attenuation; body waves; bridges; damage; design; earthquakes; elastic waves; Fairbanks Alaska; geologic hazards; Goldstream Creek; ground motion; infrastructure; natural hazards; numerical analysis; permafrost; probability; quantitative analysis; S-waves; seismic response; seismic risk; seismic waves; soil profiles; statistical analysis; strong motion; United States; velocity DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2010.08.004 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Feasibility of establishment of "Dry Ports" in the developing countries-the case of Iran AN - 1037894175; 2011-274501 AB - The main purpose of this research is to evaluate potential benefits and impacts of Dry ports for different kinds of stakeholders, which may lead to establish "Dry ports". Dry ports are intermodal inland terminals which have been established in several countries. In this paper, we designed a methodological approach with these steps: a) Comprehensive literature review, b) Definition of "Base Case" for Dry ports with required features, c) Comparative study and analysis, d) Questionnaires, e) Analysis of answered questionnaires, and f) SWOT matrix. By means of this framework, dry ports, intermodal transportation and containerization are investigated through experts' point of views. Iran is chosen as a case study, as a developing country. This study is based upon yearly information and statistics of the country. Adapted from the source document. JF - Journal of Transportation Security AU - Dadvar, Ehsan AU - Ganji, S R Seyedalizadeh AU - Tanzifi, Mohammad AD - Department of Transportation Engineering, South Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran ehsan.dadvar@gmail.com Y1 - 2011/03// PY - 2011 DA - March 2011 SP - 19 EP - 33 PB - Springer, Dordrecht The Netherlands VL - 4 IS - 1 SN - 1938-7741, 1938-7741 KW - Transportation and transportation policy - Transportation KW - Transportation and transportation policy - Maritime and inland water transport KW - Education and education policy - Statistics, research, research methods, and research support KW - Iran KW - Transportation KW - Questionnaires KW - Transportation policy KW - Benefits KW - Developing countries KW - Ports KW - article UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1037894175?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Apais&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Journal+of+Transportation+Security&rft.atitle=Feasibility+of+establishment+of+%22Dry+Ports%22+in+the+developing+countries-the+case+of+Iran&rft.au=Dadvar%2C+Ehsan%3BGanji%2C+S+R+Seyedalizadeh%3BTanzifi%2C+Mohammad&rft.aulast=Dadvar&rft.aufirst=Ehsan&rft.date=2011-03-01&rft.volume=4&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=19&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Journal+of+Transportation+Security&rft.issn=19387741&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007%2Fs12198-010-0056-x LA - English DB - PAIS Index N1 - Date revised - 2012-09-01 N1 - Last updated - 2016-09-28 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Transportation policy; Developing countries; Ports; Questionnaires; Iran; Benefits; Transportation DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12198-010-0056-x ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Getting there is half the battle; the logistical challenges of geotechnical investigations; US 17 Wilmington bypass, proposed Cape Fear River Bridge, Wilmington, NC AN - 1033533472; 2012-074195 AB - To date the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) is in the scoping phase of the geotechnical investigation for a new bridge structure on the proposed US 17 Wilmington Bypass over the Cape Fear River. The proposed bridge is over a mile in length. The NCDOT Geotechnical Unit's Contracts Group was tasked with providing the drilling services for the investigation. During the initial scoping visits, it was realized that this project is logistically challenging. Access for drilling rigs will require very specialized equipment and personnel. Also, typical ATV drilling machines will not function in portions of the proposed alignment. The structures' proposed alignment crosses areas that were once rice fields during Wilmington's Colonial days, wooded Cyprus swamps, the Cape Fear River and several large creeks and ditches. Multiple drilling access methods will be utilized. Barge-mounted drill rigs will be needed to investigate the Cape Fear River channel, as well as Toomer's Creek. Specialized swamp drilling carriers will be used to navigate the swamps and marsh lands. Track-mounted ATV's could also be used in the more wooded areas. In the coming months, the Geotechnical Unit will document the different phases of the investigations as we test the limits of the different drilling equipment. Most of the equipment needed the NCDOT does not have in-house and will have to be outsourced. Geologists working in the geotechnical field have to be able to do more than describe a sites geologic framework. Many times the geologist is given the responsibility of getting drilling equipment into places that seem too difficult. In this case the bridge foundations cannot be designed without subsurface data, so the geologist must find a way to make the investigation happen. JF - Abstracts with Programs - Geological Society of America AU - Worley, Brad AU - Youngblood, Cheryl A AU - Anonymous Y1 - 2011/03// PY - 2011 DA - March 2011 SP - 27 PB - Geological Society of America (GSA), Boulder, CO VL - 43 IS - 2 SN - 0016-7592, 0016-7592 KW - United States KW - soil mechanics KW - engineering properties KW - Wilmington North Carolina KW - Toomer's Creek KW - channels KW - New Hanover County North Carolina KW - habitat KW - foundations KW - North Carolina KW - Cape Fear River KW - bridges KW - construction KW - roads KW - 30:Engineering geology UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1033533472?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ageorefmodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Abstracts+with+Programs+-+Geological+Society+of+America&rft.atitle=Getting+there+is+half+the+battle%3B+the+logistical+challenges+of+geotechnical+investigations%3B+US+17+Wilmington+bypass%2C+proposed+Cape+Fear+River+Bridge%2C+Wilmington%2C+NC&rft.au=Worley%2C+Brad%3BYoungblood%2C+Cheryl+A%3BAnonymous&rft.aulast=Worley&rft.aufirst=Brad&rft.date=2011-03-01&rft.volume=43&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=27&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Abstracts+with+Programs+-+Geological+Society+of+America&rft.issn=00167592&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Conference title - Geological Society of America, Southeastern Section, 60th annual meeting N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2012, American Geosciences Institute. Reference includes data supplied by the Geological Society of America, Boulder, CO, United States N1 - Date revised - 2012-01-01 N1 - PubXState - CO N1 - Last updated - 2012-08-16 N1 - CODEN - GAAPBC N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - bridges; Cape Fear River; channels; construction; engineering properties; foundations; habitat; New Hanover County North Carolina; North Carolina; roads; soil mechanics; Toomer's Creek; United States; Wilmington North Carolina ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Hazardous materials in the design and construction of transportation facilities AN - 1033532869; 2012-074192 AB - The North Carolina Department of Transportation's mission is to connect people and places in North Carolina - safely and efficiently, with accountability and environmental sensitivity. In the process of fulfilling our mission we often encounter contaminated and hazardous materials on a wide variety of projects including highway widening, ferry operations, railroad sidings, bus stations, airport expansions, and bicycle and pedestrian trails. The GeoEnvironmental Section of the Department's Geotechnical Engineering Unit is tasked with investigating known and potentially contaminated properties to assist in the planning, design, construction, and maintenance of transportation projects to ensure that all waste management is safe, legally sound, cost effective, and environmentally sustainable. The GeoEnvironmental Section uses various information-gathering tools to locate and characterize subsurface objects that may present a hazard to site workers and/or the traveling public. These tools are common throughout the industry and include informal interviews with local citizens, the records review of known incidents, geophysical surveys, and soil and ground water sampling. The Department is often in an uncommon position of not being responsible for the contamination, which allows for alternative methods to address these sites of concern. One such method is to minimize the impact of the transportation project on the site by design revisions. Several projects have been successfully completed by either avoiding the contamination or by making the worksite safe for the workers and the traveling public while leaving a majority of the contaminated material in place and undisturbed until which time the regulators and responsible party can address the site. A brief overview of the life cycle of transportation projects will be presented to illustrate our involvement in the project development, planning, design, right of way, construction, and maintenance of a typical transportation project. A road widening project in Boone, North Carolina will provide a case study in which an unusually high number of known and potentially contaminated sites were addressed prior to and during construction. JF - Abstracts with Programs - Geological Society of America AU - Parker, Cyrus AU - Anonymous Y1 - 2011/03// PY - 2011 DA - March 2011 SP - 26 PB - Geological Society of America (GSA), Boulder, CO VL - 43 IS - 2 SN - 0016-7592, 0016-7592 KW - United States KW - soils KW - hazardous waste KW - optimization KW - cost KW - Watauga County North Carolina KW - environmental management KW - waste management KW - safety KW - transport KW - planning KW - Boone North Carolina KW - North Carolina KW - risk assessment KW - construction KW - roads KW - land use KW - design KW - 22:Environmental geology UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1033532869?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ageorefmodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Abstracts+with+Programs+-+Geological+Society+of+America&rft.atitle=Hazardous+materials+in+the+design+and+construction+of+transportation+facilities&rft.au=Parker%2C+Cyrus%3BAnonymous&rft.aulast=Parker&rft.aufirst=Cyrus&rft.date=2011-03-01&rft.volume=43&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=26&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Abstracts+with+Programs+-+Geological+Society+of+America&rft.issn=00167592&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Conference title - Geological Society of America, Southeastern Section, 60th annual meeting N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2012, American Geosciences Institute. Reference includes data supplied by the Geological Society of America, Boulder, CO, United States N1 - Date revised - 2012-01-01 N1 - PubXState - CO N1 - Last updated - 2012-08-16 N1 - CODEN - GAAPBC N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Boone North Carolina; construction; cost; design; environmental management; hazardous waste; land use; North Carolina; optimization; planning; risk assessment; roads; safety; soils; transport; United States; waste management; Watauga County North Carolina ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Stabilization of a large potential wedge failure along Interstate 40 in western North Carolina, October 2009 AN - 1033532861; 2012-074189 AB - In October 2009, a slide of approximately 50,000 yds (super 3) blocked all four lanes of Interstate 40 at MM 2.5 in Western NC. Geologic mapping determined that the failure was a large wedge, with a remaining 310,000 yds (super 3) of rock, perched at the edge of stability, to be removed or stabilized. This presentation will review the design and construction process required to stabilize the mass, including: design assumptions, peer review, utilization of SWEDGE software, survey work (DTM generation and LiDAR), construction under a 60-day contract for 47,000 linear feet of anchor installation, design changes during construction and the installation of a comprehensive monitoring system. The discussion will cover most geologic and engineering aspects of the mitigation. JF - Abstracts with Programs - Geological Society of America AU - Kuhne, Jody C AU - Clark, Shane C AU - Anonymous Y1 - 2011/03// PY - 2011 DA - March 2011 SP - 26 PB - Geological Society of America (GSA), Boulder, CO VL - 43 IS - 2 SN - 0016-7592, 0016-7592 KW - United States KW - soil mechanics KW - failures KW - SWEDGE KW - monitoring KW - laser methods KW - geologic hazards KW - engineering properties KW - data processing KW - digital terrain models KW - computer programs KW - lidar methods KW - regional KW - North Carolina KW - natural hazards KW - risk assessment KW - erodibility KW - slope stability KW - construction KW - roads KW - 30:Engineering geology UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1033532861?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ageorefmodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Abstracts+with+Programs+-+Geological+Society+of+America&rft.atitle=Stabilization+of+a+large+potential+wedge+failure+along+Interstate+40+in+western+North+Carolina%2C+October+2009&rft.au=Kuhne%2C+Jody+C%3BClark%2C+Shane+C%3BAnonymous&rft.aulast=Kuhne&rft.aufirst=Jody&rft.date=2011-03-01&rft.volume=43&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=26&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Abstracts+with+Programs+-+Geological+Society+of+America&rft.issn=00167592&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Conference title - Geological Society of America, Southeastern Section, 60th annual meeting N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2012, American Geosciences Institute. Reference includes data supplied by the Geological Society of America, Boulder, CO, United States N1 - Date revised - 2012-01-01 N1 - PubXState - CO N1 - Last updated - 2012-08-16 N1 - CODEN - GAAPBC N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - computer programs; construction; data processing; digital terrain models; engineering properties; erodibility; failures; geologic hazards; laser methods; lidar methods; monitoring; natural hazards; North Carolina; regional; risk assessment; roads; slope stability; soil mechanics; SWEDGE; United States ER - TY - JOUR T1 - History of modern earthquake hazard mapping and assessment in California using a deterministic or scenario approach AN - 1026860597; 2012-062710 AB - Modern earthquake ground motion hazard mapping in California began following the 1971 San Fernando earthquake in the Los Angeles metropolitan area of southern California. Earthquake hazard assessment followed a traditional approach, later called Deterministic Seismic Hazard Analysis (DSHA) in order to distinguish it from the newer Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis (PSHA). In DSHA, seismic hazard in the event of the Maximum Credible Earthquake (MCE) magnitude from each of the known seismogenic faults within and near the state are assessed. The likely occurrence of the MCE has been assumed qualitatively by using late Quaternary and younger faults that are presumed to be seismogenic, but not when or within what time intervals MCE may occur. MCE is the largest or upper-bound potential earthquake in moment magnitude, and it supersedes and automatically considers all other possible earthquakes on that fault. That moment magnitude is used for estimating ground motions by applying it to empirical attenuation relationships, and for calculating ground motions as in neo-DSHA (Zuccolo et al., 2008). The first deterministic California earthquake hazard map was published in 1974 by the California Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG) which has been called the California Geological Survey (CGS) since 2002, using the best available fault information and ground motion attenuation relationships at that time. The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) later assumed responsibility for printing the refined and updated peak acceleration contour maps which were heavily utilized by geologists, seismologists, and engineers for many years. Some engineers involved in the siting process of large important projects, for example, dams and nuclear power plants, continued to challenge the map(s). The second edition map was completed in 1985 incorporating more faults, improving MCE's estimation method, and using new ground motion attenuation relationships from the latest published results at that time. CDMG eventually published the second edition map in 1992 following the Governor's Board of Inquiry on the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake and at the demand of Caltrans. The third edition map was published by Caltrans in 1996 utilizing GIS technology to manage data that includes a simplified three-dimension geometry of faults and to facilitate efficient corrections and revisions of data and the map. The spatial relationship of fault hazards with highways, bridges or any other attribute can be efficiently managed and analyzed now in GIS at Caltrans. There has been great confidence in using DSHA in bridge engineering and other applications in California, and it can be confidently applied in any other earthquake-prone region. Earthquake hazards defined by DSHA are: (1) transparent and stable with robust MCE moment magnitudes; (2) flexible in their application to design considerations; (3) can easily incorporate advances in ground motion simulations; and (4) economical. DSHA and neo-DSHA have the same approach and applicability. The accuracy of DSHA has proven to be quite reasonable for practical applications within engineering design and always done with professional judgment. In the final analysis, DSHA is a reality-check for public safety and PSHA results. Although PSHA has been acclaimed as a better approach for seismic hazard assessment, it is DSHA, not PSHA, that has actually been used in seismic hazard assessment for building and bridge engineering, particularly in California. Copyright 2011 Springer Basel AG and 2010 Birkhauser / Springer Basel AG JF - Pure and Applied Geophysics AU - Mualchin, Lalliana Y1 - 2011/03// PY - 2011 DA - March 2011 SP - 383 EP - 407 PB - Birkhaeuser, Basel VL - 168 IS - 3-4 SN - 0033-4553, 0033-4553 KW - United States KW - civil engineering KW - geologic hazards KW - San Fernando earthquake 1971 KW - acceleration KW - power plants KW - mapping KW - Cenozoic KW - California KW - seismic zoning KW - attenuation KW - maximum credible earthquake KW - seismic risk KW - bridges KW - faults KW - Quaternary KW - deterministic methods KW - structures KW - history KW - nuclear energy KW - natural hazards KW - ground motion KW - risk assessment KW - earthquakes KW - roads KW - design KW - 30:Engineering geology KW - 19:Seismology UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1026860597?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ageorefmodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Pure+and+Applied+Geophysics&rft.atitle=History+of+modern+earthquake+hazard+mapping+and+assessment+in+California+using+a+deterministic+or+scenario+approach&rft.au=Mualchin%2C+Lalliana&rft.aulast=Mualchin&rft.aufirst=Lalliana&rft.date=2011-03-01&rft.volume=168&rft.issue=3-4&rft.spage=383&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Pure+and+Applied+Geophysics&rft.issn=00334553&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007%2Fs00024-010-0121-1 L2 - http://link.springer.de/link/service/journals/00024/index.htm LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2012, American Geosciences Institute. Reference includes data supplied by Springer Verlag, Berlin, Federal Republic of Germany N1 - Date revised - 2012-01-01 N1 - Number of references - 63 N1 - Document feature - illus. incl. 3 tables, geol. sketch maps N1 - Last updated - 2012-07-19 N1 - CODEN - PAGYAV N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - acceleration; attenuation; bridges; California; Cenozoic; civil engineering; design; deterministic methods; earthquakes; faults; geologic hazards; ground motion; history; mapping; maximum credible earthquake; natural hazards; nuclear energy; power plants; Quaternary; risk assessment; roads; San Fernando earthquake 1971; seismic risk; seismic zoning; structures; United States DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00024-010-0121-1 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - YERBA BUENA ISLAND RAMPS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ON INTERSTATE 80 (I-80), CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. [Part 14 of 14] T2 - YERBA BUENA ISLAND RAMPS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ON INTERSTATE 80 (I-80), CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. AN - 876254792; 14800-4_0014 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the existing westbound on-ramp and the westbound off-ramp connecting to Interstate 80 (I-80) on the eastern side of Yerba Buena Island (YBI), San Francisco, California is proposed. YBI is located in the San Francisco Bay, halfway between Oakland and San Francisco, and is accessible by vehicles only via the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge (SFOBB), which is part of I-80. The SFOBB is a critical link in the interstate network, providing access between San Francisco and the East Bay. YBI and Treasure Island, which lies to the north, are accessed by on-and off-ramps located on the upper and lower decks of the SFOBB. The SFOBB and the on- and off-ramps provide the only land access to the active U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) facilities located on the southern side of YBI. Geometric and operational deficiencies of the existing ramps have resulted in accident rates higher than the statewide rate for similar facilities and the westbound on-ramp merge lengths and off-ramp deceleration lengths do not meet current California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) standards. Projections of 2035 traffic volumes indicate ramp operations at a failing level of service in both the morning and evening peak hours. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives are evaluated in this draft EIS. Alternative 2b would include removal of the existing westbound on- and off-ramps, construction of a westbound hook on-ramp from Macalla Road, and construction of a westbound off-ramp to Macalla Road. The westbound on-ramp would begin at a "T" intersection at Macalla Road, loop right with a tight radius, and merge on to the north side of the Bay Bridge. The length of this ramp would be 867 feet and it would have two traffic lanes, merging into one as it connects to the SFOBB. One lane would be a high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane and the other a mixed-flow lane. The westbound off-ramp would diverge from the new SFOBB transition structure and terminate at a "T" intersection at Macalla Road. The length of this ramp would be 1,115 feet and a stop sign is proposed at the ramp terminus. Macalla Road would be widened for 662 feet adjacent to the terminus of the westbound on- and off-ramps to accommodate a future 12-foot-wide multi-use pedestrian/bike path and two 12-foot-wide lanes within the Caltrans right-of-way. A retaining wall would be constructed to provide the required width and retain the hillside above Macalla Road. The roadway width would vary around the curve at South Gate Road to provide proper width for truck turning movements. The westbound on- and off-ramps would terminate at Macalla Road where Quarters 10/Building 267 are currently located, requiring their removal. Under Alternative 4, the westbound on-ramp would begin at South Gate Road, proceed east paralleling the eastbound on-ramp, loop under the new SFOBB transition structure near its eastern end to provide adequate merging distances, and cross over the westbound off-ramp along the north side of the Bay Bridge. The length of this ramp would be 2,884 feet. An HOV lane would not be provided. The westbound off-ramp would diverge from the new SFOBB transition structure, parallel the transition structure, cross under the westbound on-ramp, and terminate at a "T" intersection at North Gate Road. The length of this ramp would be 1,168 feet and a stop sign is proposed at the ramp terminus. An HOV lane would not be provided. Quarters 10/Building 267 and associated landscaping would remain in place. Total costs for Alternative 2b and Alternative 4 are estimated at $79 million and $159 million, respectively. The right-of-way capital costs include easements from the USCG for both alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Ramp replacement would increase traffic safety by improving the geometry and operations of the westbound on- and off-ramps. Temporarily disturbed woodland and forested areas would be restored after completion of construction activities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities would have temporary noise and traffic impacts including detours and single-lane closures. Three historic properties (Senior Officers Quarters Historic District, Quarters 1/Nimitz House, and Quarters 10/Building 267) would be adversely affected. Under Alternative 2b, Quarters 10/Building 267) would be acquired, removed, and relocated. Under Alternative 4, ramps would be directly above the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commissions 100-foot shoreline band. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and General Bridge Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 535). JF - EPA number: 110044, Volume I--688 pages and maps, Volume II--1,356 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Easements KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Islands KW - Military Facilities (Coast Guard) KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - California KW - San Francisco Bay KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - General Bridge Act of 1946, Coast Guard Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254792?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=YERBA+BUENA+ISLAND+RAMPS+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT+ON+INTERSTATE+80+%28I-80%29%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=YERBA+BUENA+ISLAND+RAMPS+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT+ON+INTERSTATE+80+%28I-80%29%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - California Department of Transportation, Oakland, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - YERBA BUENA ISLAND RAMPS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ON INTERSTATE 80 (I-80), CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. [Part 8 of 14] T2 - YERBA BUENA ISLAND RAMPS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ON INTERSTATE 80 (I-80), CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. AN - 876254512; 14800-4_0008 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the existing westbound on-ramp and the westbound off-ramp connecting to Interstate 80 (I-80) on the eastern side of Yerba Buena Island (YBI), San Francisco, California is proposed. YBI is located in the San Francisco Bay, halfway between Oakland and San Francisco, and is accessible by vehicles only via the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge (SFOBB), which is part of I-80. The SFOBB is a critical link in the interstate network, providing access between San Francisco and the East Bay. YBI and Treasure Island, which lies to the north, are accessed by on-and off-ramps located on the upper and lower decks of the SFOBB. The SFOBB and the on- and off-ramps provide the only land access to the active U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) facilities located on the southern side of YBI. Geometric and operational deficiencies of the existing ramps have resulted in accident rates higher than the statewide rate for similar facilities and the westbound on-ramp merge lengths and off-ramp deceleration lengths do not meet current California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) standards. Projections of 2035 traffic volumes indicate ramp operations at a failing level of service in both the morning and evening peak hours. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives are evaluated in this draft EIS. Alternative 2b would include removal of the existing westbound on- and off-ramps, construction of a westbound hook on-ramp from Macalla Road, and construction of a westbound off-ramp to Macalla Road. The westbound on-ramp would begin at a "T" intersection at Macalla Road, loop right with a tight radius, and merge on to the north side of the Bay Bridge. The length of this ramp would be 867 feet and it would have two traffic lanes, merging into one as it connects to the SFOBB. One lane would be a high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane and the other a mixed-flow lane. The westbound off-ramp would diverge from the new SFOBB transition structure and terminate at a "T" intersection at Macalla Road. The length of this ramp would be 1,115 feet and a stop sign is proposed at the ramp terminus. Macalla Road would be widened for 662 feet adjacent to the terminus of the westbound on- and off-ramps to accommodate a future 12-foot-wide multi-use pedestrian/bike path and two 12-foot-wide lanes within the Caltrans right-of-way. A retaining wall would be constructed to provide the required width and retain the hillside above Macalla Road. The roadway width would vary around the curve at South Gate Road to provide proper width for truck turning movements. The westbound on- and off-ramps would terminate at Macalla Road where Quarters 10/Building 267 are currently located, requiring their removal. Under Alternative 4, the westbound on-ramp would begin at South Gate Road, proceed east paralleling the eastbound on-ramp, loop under the new SFOBB transition structure near its eastern end to provide adequate merging distances, and cross over the westbound off-ramp along the north side of the Bay Bridge. The length of this ramp would be 2,884 feet. An HOV lane would not be provided. The westbound off-ramp would diverge from the new SFOBB transition structure, parallel the transition structure, cross under the westbound on-ramp, and terminate at a "T" intersection at North Gate Road. The length of this ramp would be 1,168 feet and a stop sign is proposed at the ramp terminus. An HOV lane would not be provided. Quarters 10/Building 267 and associated landscaping would remain in place. Total costs for Alternative 2b and Alternative 4 are estimated at $79 million and $159 million, respectively. The right-of-way capital costs include easements from the USCG for both alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Ramp replacement would increase traffic safety by improving the geometry and operations of the westbound on- and off-ramps. Temporarily disturbed woodland and forested areas would be restored after completion of construction activities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities would have temporary noise and traffic impacts including detours and single-lane closures. Three historic properties (Senior Officers Quarters Historic District, Quarters 1/Nimitz House, and Quarters 10/Building 267) would be adversely affected. Under Alternative 2b, Quarters 10/Building 267) would be acquired, removed, and relocated. Under Alternative 4, ramps would be directly above the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commissions 100-foot shoreline band. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and General Bridge Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 535). JF - EPA number: 110044, Volume I--688 pages and maps, Volume II--1,356 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Easements KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Islands KW - Military Facilities (Coast Guard) KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - California KW - San Francisco Bay KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - General Bridge Act of 1946, Coast Guard Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254512?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=YERBA+BUENA+ISLAND+RAMPS+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT+ON+INTERSTATE+80+%28I-80%29%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=YERBA+BUENA+ISLAND+RAMPS+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT+ON+INTERSTATE+80+%28I-80%29%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - California Department of Transportation, Oakland, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - YERBA BUENA ISLAND RAMPS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ON INTERSTATE 80 (I-80), CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. [Part 7 of 14] T2 - YERBA BUENA ISLAND RAMPS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ON INTERSTATE 80 (I-80), CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. AN - 876254507; 14800-4_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the existing westbound on-ramp and the westbound off-ramp connecting to Interstate 80 (I-80) on the eastern side of Yerba Buena Island (YBI), San Francisco, California is proposed. YBI is located in the San Francisco Bay, halfway between Oakland and San Francisco, and is accessible by vehicles only via the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge (SFOBB), which is part of I-80. The SFOBB is a critical link in the interstate network, providing access between San Francisco and the East Bay. YBI and Treasure Island, which lies to the north, are accessed by on-and off-ramps located on the upper and lower decks of the SFOBB. The SFOBB and the on- and off-ramps provide the only land access to the active U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) facilities located on the southern side of YBI. Geometric and operational deficiencies of the existing ramps have resulted in accident rates higher than the statewide rate for similar facilities and the westbound on-ramp merge lengths and off-ramp deceleration lengths do not meet current California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) standards. Projections of 2035 traffic volumes indicate ramp operations at a failing level of service in both the morning and evening peak hours. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives are evaluated in this draft EIS. Alternative 2b would include removal of the existing westbound on- and off-ramps, construction of a westbound hook on-ramp from Macalla Road, and construction of a westbound off-ramp to Macalla Road. The westbound on-ramp would begin at a "T" intersection at Macalla Road, loop right with a tight radius, and merge on to the north side of the Bay Bridge. The length of this ramp would be 867 feet and it would have two traffic lanes, merging into one as it connects to the SFOBB. One lane would be a high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane and the other a mixed-flow lane. The westbound off-ramp would diverge from the new SFOBB transition structure and terminate at a "T" intersection at Macalla Road. The length of this ramp would be 1,115 feet and a stop sign is proposed at the ramp terminus. Macalla Road would be widened for 662 feet adjacent to the terminus of the westbound on- and off-ramps to accommodate a future 12-foot-wide multi-use pedestrian/bike path and two 12-foot-wide lanes within the Caltrans right-of-way. A retaining wall would be constructed to provide the required width and retain the hillside above Macalla Road. The roadway width would vary around the curve at South Gate Road to provide proper width for truck turning movements. The westbound on- and off-ramps would terminate at Macalla Road where Quarters 10/Building 267 are currently located, requiring their removal. Under Alternative 4, the westbound on-ramp would begin at South Gate Road, proceed east paralleling the eastbound on-ramp, loop under the new SFOBB transition structure near its eastern end to provide adequate merging distances, and cross over the westbound off-ramp along the north side of the Bay Bridge. The length of this ramp would be 2,884 feet. An HOV lane would not be provided. The westbound off-ramp would diverge from the new SFOBB transition structure, parallel the transition structure, cross under the westbound on-ramp, and terminate at a "T" intersection at North Gate Road. The length of this ramp would be 1,168 feet and a stop sign is proposed at the ramp terminus. An HOV lane would not be provided. Quarters 10/Building 267 and associated landscaping would remain in place. Total costs for Alternative 2b and Alternative 4 are estimated at $79 million and $159 million, respectively. The right-of-way capital costs include easements from the USCG for both alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Ramp replacement would increase traffic safety by improving the geometry and operations of the westbound on- and off-ramps. Temporarily disturbed woodland and forested areas would be restored after completion of construction activities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities would have temporary noise and traffic impacts including detours and single-lane closures. Three historic properties (Senior Officers Quarters Historic District, Quarters 1/Nimitz House, and Quarters 10/Building 267) would be adversely affected. Under Alternative 2b, Quarters 10/Building 267) would be acquired, removed, and relocated. Under Alternative 4, ramps would be directly above the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commissions 100-foot shoreline band. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and General Bridge Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 535). JF - EPA number: 110044, Volume I--688 pages and maps, Volume II--1,356 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Easements KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Islands KW - Military Facilities (Coast Guard) KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - California KW - San Francisco Bay KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - General Bridge Act of 1946, Coast Guard Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254507?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=YERBA+BUENA+ISLAND+RAMPS+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT+ON+INTERSTATE+80+%28I-80%29%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=YERBA+BUENA+ISLAND+RAMPS+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT+ON+INTERSTATE+80+%28I-80%29%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - California Department of Transportation, Oakland, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - YERBA BUENA ISLAND RAMPS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ON INTERSTATE 80 (I-80), CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. [Part 6 of 14] T2 - YERBA BUENA ISLAND RAMPS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ON INTERSTATE 80 (I-80), CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. AN - 876254497; 14800-4_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the existing westbound on-ramp and the westbound off-ramp connecting to Interstate 80 (I-80) on the eastern side of Yerba Buena Island (YBI), San Francisco, California is proposed. YBI is located in the San Francisco Bay, halfway between Oakland and San Francisco, and is accessible by vehicles only via the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge (SFOBB), which is part of I-80. The SFOBB is a critical link in the interstate network, providing access between San Francisco and the East Bay. YBI and Treasure Island, which lies to the north, are accessed by on-and off-ramps located on the upper and lower decks of the SFOBB. The SFOBB and the on- and off-ramps provide the only land access to the active U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) facilities located on the southern side of YBI. Geometric and operational deficiencies of the existing ramps have resulted in accident rates higher than the statewide rate for similar facilities and the westbound on-ramp merge lengths and off-ramp deceleration lengths do not meet current California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) standards. Projections of 2035 traffic volumes indicate ramp operations at a failing level of service in both the morning and evening peak hours. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives are evaluated in this draft EIS. Alternative 2b would include removal of the existing westbound on- and off-ramps, construction of a westbound hook on-ramp from Macalla Road, and construction of a westbound off-ramp to Macalla Road. The westbound on-ramp would begin at a "T" intersection at Macalla Road, loop right with a tight radius, and merge on to the north side of the Bay Bridge. The length of this ramp would be 867 feet and it would have two traffic lanes, merging into one as it connects to the SFOBB. One lane would be a high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane and the other a mixed-flow lane. The westbound off-ramp would diverge from the new SFOBB transition structure and terminate at a "T" intersection at Macalla Road. The length of this ramp would be 1,115 feet and a stop sign is proposed at the ramp terminus. Macalla Road would be widened for 662 feet adjacent to the terminus of the westbound on- and off-ramps to accommodate a future 12-foot-wide multi-use pedestrian/bike path and two 12-foot-wide lanes within the Caltrans right-of-way. A retaining wall would be constructed to provide the required width and retain the hillside above Macalla Road. The roadway width would vary around the curve at South Gate Road to provide proper width for truck turning movements. The westbound on- and off-ramps would terminate at Macalla Road where Quarters 10/Building 267 are currently located, requiring their removal. Under Alternative 4, the westbound on-ramp would begin at South Gate Road, proceed east paralleling the eastbound on-ramp, loop under the new SFOBB transition structure near its eastern end to provide adequate merging distances, and cross over the westbound off-ramp along the north side of the Bay Bridge. The length of this ramp would be 2,884 feet. An HOV lane would not be provided. The westbound off-ramp would diverge from the new SFOBB transition structure, parallel the transition structure, cross under the westbound on-ramp, and terminate at a "T" intersection at North Gate Road. The length of this ramp would be 1,168 feet and a stop sign is proposed at the ramp terminus. An HOV lane would not be provided. Quarters 10/Building 267 and associated landscaping would remain in place. Total costs for Alternative 2b and Alternative 4 are estimated at $79 million and $159 million, respectively. The right-of-way capital costs include easements from the USCG for both alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Ramp replacement would increase traffic safety by improving the geometry and operations of the westbound on- and off-ramps. Temporarily disturbed woodland and forested areas would be restored after completion of construction activities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities would have temporary noise and traffic impacts including detours and single-lane closures. Three historic properties (Senior Officers Quarters Historic District, Quarters 1/Nimitz House, and Quarters 10/Building 267) would be adversely affected. Under Alternative 2b, Quarters 10/Building 267) would be acquired, removed, and relocated. Under Alternative 4, ramps would be directly above the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commissions 100-foot shoreline band. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and General Bridge Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 535). JF - EPA number: 110044, Volume I--688 pages and maps, Volume II--1,356 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Easements KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Islands KW - Military Facilities (Coast Guard) KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - California KW - San Francisco Bay KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - General Bridge Act of 1946, Coast Guard Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254497?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=YERBA+BUENA+ISLAND+RAMPS+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT+ON+INTERSTATE+80+%28I-80%29%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=YERBA+BUENA+ISLAND+RAMPS+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT+ON+INTERSTATE+80+%28I-80%29%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - California Department of Transportation, Oakland, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - YERBA BUENA ISLAND RAMPS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ON INTERSTATE 80 (I-80), CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. [Part 1 of 14] T2 - YERBA BUENA ISLAND RAMPS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ON INTERSTATE 80 (I-80), CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. AN - 876254481; 14800-4_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the existing westbound on-ramp and the westbound off-ramp connecting to Interstate 80 (I-80) on the eastern side of Yerba Buena Island (YBI), San Francisco, California is proposed. YBI is located in the San Francisco Bay, halfway between Oakland and San Francisco, and is accessible by vehicles only via the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge (SFOBB), which is part of I-80. The SFOBB is a critical link in the interstate network, providing access between San Francisco and the East Bay. YBI and Treasure Island, which lies to the north, are accessed by on-and off-ramps located on the upper and lower decks of the SFOBB. The SFOBB and the on- and off-ramps provide the only land access to the active U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) facilities located on the southern side of YBI. Geometric and operational deficiencies of the existing ramps have resulted in accident rates higher than the statewide rate for similar facilities and the westbound on-ramp merge lengths and off-ramp deceleration lengths do not meet current California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) standards. Projections of 2035 traffic volumes indicate ramp operations at a failing level of service in both the morning and evening peak hours. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives are evaluated in this draft EIS. Alternative 2b would include removal of the existing westbound on- and off-ramps, construction of a westbound hook on-ramp from Macalla Road, and construction of a westbound off-ramp to Macalla Road. The westbound on-ramp would begin at a "T" intersection at Macalla Road, loop right with a tight radius, and merge on to the north side of the Bay Bridge. The length of this ramp would be 867 feet and it would have two traffic lanes, merging into one as it connects to the SFOBB. One lane would be a high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane and the other a mixed-flow lane. The westbound off-ramp would diverge from the new SFOBB transition structure and terminate at a "T" intersection at Macalla Road. The length of this ramp would be 1,115 feet and a stop sign is proposed at the ramp terminus. Macalla Road would be widened for 662 feet adjacent to the terminus of the westbound on- and off-ramps to accommodate a future 12-foot-wide multi-use pedestrian/bike path and two 12-foot-wide lanes within the Caltrans right-of-way. A retaining wall would be constructed to provide the required width and retain the hillside above Macalla Road. The roadway width would vary around the curve at South Gate Road to provide proper width for truck turning movements. The westbound on- and off-ramps would terminate at Macalla Road where Quarters 10/Building 267 are currently located, requiring their removal. Under Alternative 4, the westbound on-ramp would begin at South Gate Road, proceed east paralleling the eastbound on-ramp, loop under the new SFOBB transition structure near its eastern end to provide adequate merging distances, and cross over the westbound off-ramp along the north side of the Bay Bridge. The length of this ramp would be 2,884 feet. An HOV lane would not be provided. The westbound off-ramp would diverge from the new SFOBB transition structure, parallel the transition structure, cross under the westbound on-ramp, and terminate at a "T" intersection at North Gate Road. The length of this ramp would be 1,168 feet and a stop sign is proposed at the ramp terminus. An HOV lane would not be provided. Quarters 10/Building 267 and associated landscaping would remain in place. Total costs for Alternative 2b and Alternative 4 are estimated at $79 million and $159 million, respectively. The right-of-way capital costs include easements from the USCG for both alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Ramp replacement would increase traffic safety by improving the geometry and operations of the westbound on- and off-ramps. Temporarily disturbed woodland and forested areas would be restored after completion of construction activities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities would have temporary noise and traffic impacts including detours and single-lane closures. Three historic properties (Senior Officers Quarters Historic District, Quarters 1/Nimitz House, and Quarters 10/Building 267) would be adversely affected. Under Alternative 2b, Quarters 10/Building 267) would be acquired, removed, and relocated. Under Alternative 4, ramps would be directly above the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commissions 100-foot shoreline band. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and General Bridge Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 535). JF - EPA number: 110044, Volume I--688 pages and maps, Volume II--1,356 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Easements KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Islands KW - Military Facilities (Coast Guard) KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - California KW - San Francisco Bay KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - General Bridge Act of 1946, Coast Guard Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254481?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=YERBA+BUENA+ISLAND+RAMPS+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT+ON+INTERSTATE+80+%28I-80%29%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=YERBA+BUENA+ISLAND+RAMPS+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT+ON+INTERSTATE+80+%28I-80%29%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - California Department of Transportation, Oakland, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - YERBA BUENA ISLAND RAMPS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ON INTERSTATE 80 (I-80), CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. [Part 4 of 14] T2 - YERBA BUENA ISLAND RAMPS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ON INTERSTATE 80 (I-80), CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. AN - 876254135; 14800-4_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the existing westbound on-ramp and the westbound off-ramp connecting to Interstate 80 (I-80) on the eastern side of Yerba Buena Island (YBI), San Francisco, California is proposed. YBI is located in the San Francisco Bay, halfway between Oakland and San Francisco, and is accessible by vehicles only via the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge (SFOBB), which is part of I-80. The SFOBB is a critical link in the interstate network, providing access between San Francisco and the East Bay. YBI and Treasure Island, which lies to the north, are accessed by on-and off-ramps located on the upper and lower decks of the SFOBB. The SFOBB and the on- and off-ramps provide the only land access to the active U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) facilities located on the southern side of YBI. Geometric and operational deficiencies of the existing ramps have resulted in accident rates higher than the statewide rate for similar facilities and the westbound on-ramp merge lengths and off-ramp deceleration lengths do not meet current California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) standards. Projections of 2035 traffic volumes indicate ramp operations at a failing level of service in both the morning and evening peak hours. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives are evaluated in this draft EIS. Alternative 2b would include removal of the existing westbound on- and off-ramps, construction of a westbound hook on-ramp from Macalla Road, and construction of a westbound off-ramp to Macalla Road. The westbound on-ramp would begin at a "T" intersection at Macalla Road, loop right with a tight radius, and merge on to the north side of the Bay Bridge. The length of this ramp would be 867 feet and it would have two traffic lanes, merging into one as it connects to the SFOBB. One lane would be a high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane and the other a mixed-flow lane. The westbound off-ramp would diverge from the new SFOBB transition structure and terminate at a "T" intersection at Macalla Road. The length of this ramp would be 1,115 feet and a stop sign is proposed at the ramp terminus. Macalla Road would be widened for 662 feet adjacent to the terminus of the westbound on- and off-ramps to accommodate a future 12-foot-wide multi-use pedestrian/bike path and two 12-foot-wide lanes within the Caltrans right-of-way. A retaining wall would be constructed to provide the required width and retain the hillside above Macalla Road. The roadway width would vary around the curve at South Gate Road to provide proper width for truck turning movements. The westbound on- and off-ramps would terminate at Macalla Road where Quarters 10/Building 267 are currently located, requiring their removal. Under Alternative 4, the westbound on-ramp would begin at South Gate Road, proceed east paralleling the eastbound on-ramp, loop under the new SFOBB transition structure near its eastern end to provide adequate merging distances, and cross over the westbound off-ramp along the north side of the Bay Bridge. The length of this ramp would be 2,884 feet. An HOV lane would not be provided. The westbound off-ramp would diverge from the new SFOBB transition structure, parallel the transition structure, cross under the westbound on-ramp, and terminate at a "T" intersection at North Gate Road. The length of this ramp would be 1,168 feet and a stop sign is proposed at the ramp terminus. An HOV lane would not be provided. Quarters 10/Building 267 and associated landscaping would remain in place. Total costs for Alternative 2b and Alternative 4 are estimated at $79 million and $159 million, respectively. The right-of-way capital costs include easements from the USCG for both alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Ramp replacement would increase traffic safety by improving the geometry and operations of the westbound on- and off-ramps. Temporarily disturbed woodland and forested areas would be restored after completion of construction activities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities would have temporary noise and traffic impacts including detours and single-lane closures. Three historic properties (Senior Officers Quarters Historic District, Quarters 1/Nimitz House, and Quarters 10/Building 267) would be adversely affected. Under Alternative 2b, Quarters 10/Building 267) would be acquired, removed, and relocated. Under Alternative 4, ramps would be directly above the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commissions 100-foot shoreline band. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and General Bridge Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 535). JF - EPA number: 110044, Volume I--688 pages and maps, Volume II--1,356 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Easements KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Islands KW - Military Facilities (Coast Guard) KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - California KW - San Francisco Bay KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - General Bridge Act of 1946, Coast Guard Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254135?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=YERBA+BUENA+ISLAND+RAMPS+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT+ON+INTERSTATE+80+%28I-80%29%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=YERBA+BUENA+ISLAND+RAMPS+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT+ON+INTERSTATE+80+%28I-80%29%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - California Department of Transportation, Oakland, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - YERBA BUENA ISLAND RAMPS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ON INTERSTATE 80 (I-80), CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. [Part 3 of 14] T2 - YERBA BUENA ISLAND RAMPS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ON INTERSTATE 80 (I-80), CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. AN - 876254132; 14800-4_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the existing westbound on-ramp and the westbound off-ramp connecting to Interstate 80 (I-80) on the eastern side of Yerba Buena Island (YBI), San Francisco, California is proposed. YBI is located in the San Francisco Bay, halfway between Oakland and San Francisco, and is accessible by vehicles only via the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge (SFOBB), which is part of I-80. The SFOBB is a critical link in the interstate network, providing access between San Francisco and the East Bay. YBI and Treasure Island, which lies to the north, are accessed by on-and off-ramps located on the upper and lower decks of the SFOBB. The SFOBB and the on- and off-ramps provide the only land access to the active U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) facilities located on the southern side of YBI. Geometric and operational deficiencies of the existing ramps have resulted in accident rates higher than the statewide rate for similar facilities and the westbound on-ramp merge lengths and off-ramp deceleration lengths do not meet current California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) standards. Projections of 2035 traffic volumes indicate ramp operations at a failing level of service in both the morning and evening peak hours. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives are evaluated in this draft EIS. Alternative 2b would include removal of the existing westbound on- and off-ramps, construction of a westbound hook on-ramp from Macalla Road, and construction of a westbound off-ramp to Macalla Road. The westbound on-ramp would begin at a "T" intersection at Macalla Road, loop right with a tight radius, and merge on to the north side of the Bay Bridge. The length of this ramp would be 867 feet and it would have two traffic lanes, merging into one as it connects to the SFOBB. One lane would be a high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane and the other a mixed-flow lane. The westbound off-ramp would diverge from the new SFOBB transition structure and terminate at a "T" intersection at Macalla Road. The length of this ramp would be 1,115 feet and a stop sign is proposed at the ramp terminus. Macalla Road would be widened for 662 feet adjacent to the terminus of the westbound on- and off-ramps to accommodate a future 12-foot-wide multi-use pedestrian/bike path and two 12-foot-wide lanes within the Caltrans right-of-way. A retaining wall would be constructed to provide the required width and retain the hillside above Macalla Road. The roadway width would vary around the curve at South Gate Road to provide proper width for truck turning movements. The westbound on- and off-ramps would terminate at Macalla Road where Quarters 10/Building 267 are currently located, requiring their removal. Under Alternative 4, the westbound on-ramp would begin at South Gate Road, proceed east paralleling the eastbound on-ramp, loop under the new SFOBB transition structure near its eastern end to provide adequate merging distances, and cross over the westbound off-ramp along the north side of the Bay Bridge. The length of this ramp would be 2,884 feet. An HOV lane would not be provided. The westbound off-ramp would diverge from the new SFOBB transition structure, parallel the transition structure, cross under the westbound on-ramp, and terminate at a "T" intersection at North Gate Road. The length of this ramp would be 1,168 feet and a stop sign is proposed at the ramp terminus. An HOV lane would not be provided. Quarters 10/Building 267 and associated landscaping would remain in place. Total costs for Alternative 2b and Alternative 4 are estimated at $79 million and $159 million, respectively. The right-of-way capital costs include easements from the USCG for both alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Ramp replacement would increase traffic safety by improving the geometry and operations of the westbound on- and off-ramps. Temporarily disturbed woodland and forested areas would be restored after completion of construction activities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities would have temporary noise and traffic impacts including detours and single-lane closures. Three historic properties (Senior Officers Quarters Historic District, Quarters 1/Nimitz House, and Quarters 10/Building 267) would be adversely affected. Under Alternative 2b, Quarters 10/Building 267) would be acquired, removed, and relocated. Under Alternative 4, ramps would be directly above the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commissions 100-foot shoreline band. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and General Bridge Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 535). JF - EPA number: 110044, Volume I--688 pages and maps, Volume II--1,356 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Easements KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Islands KW - Military Facilities (Coast Guard) KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - California KW - San Francisco Bay KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - General Bridge Act of 1946, Coast Guard Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254132?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=YERBA+BUENA+ISLAND+RAMPS+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT+ON+INTERSTATE+80+%28I-80%29%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=YERBA+BUENA+ISLAND+RAMPS+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT+ON+INTERSTATE+80+%28I-80%29%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - California Department of Transportation, Oakland, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - YERBA BUENA ISLAND RAMPS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ON INTERSTATE 80 (I-80), CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. [Part 5 of 14] T2 - YERBA BUENA ISLAND RAMPS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ON INTERSTATE 80 (I-80), CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. AN - 876253648; 14800-4_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the existing westbound on-ramp and the westbound off-ramp connecting to Interstate 80 (I-80) on the eastern side of Yerba Buena Island (YBI), San Francisco, California is proposed. YBI is located in the San Francisco Bay, halfway between Oakland and San Francisco, and is accessible by vehicles only via the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge (SFOBB), which is part of I-80. The SFOBB is a critical link in the interstate network, providing access between San Francisco and the East Bay. YBI and Treasure Island, which lies to the north, are accessed by on-and off-ramps located on the upper and lower decks of the SFOBB. The SFOBB and the on- and off-ramps provide the only land access to the active U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) facilities located on the southern side of YBI. Geometric and operational deficiencies of the existing ramps have resulted in accident rates higher than the statewide rate for similar facilities and the westbound on-ramp merge lengths and off-ramp deceleration lengths do not meet current California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) standards. Projections of 2035 traffic volumes indicate ramp operations at a failing level of service in both the morning and evening peak hours. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives are evaluated in this draft EIS. Alternative 2b would include removal of the existing westbound on- and off-ramps, construction of a westbound hook on-ramp from Macalla Road, and construction of a westbound off-ramp to Macalla Road. The westbound on-ramp would begin at a "T" intersection at Macalla Road, loop right with a tight radius, and merge on to the north side of the Bay Bridge. The length of this ramp would be 867 feet and it would have two traffic lanes, merging into one as it connects to the SFOBB. One lane would be a high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane and the other a mixed-flow lane. The westbound off-ramp would diverge from the new SFOBB transition structure and terminate at a "T" intersection at Macalla Road. The length of this ramp would be 1,115 feet and a stop sign is proposed at the ramp terminus. Macalla Road would be widened for 662 feet adjacent to the terminus of the westbound on- and off-ramps to accommodate a future 12-foot-wide multi-use pedestrian/bike path and two 12-foot-wide lanes within the Caltrans right-of-way. A retaining wall would be constructed to provide the required width and retain the hillside above Macalla Road. The roadway width would vary around the curve at South Gate Road to provide proper width for truck turning movements. The westbound on- and off-ramps would terminate at Macalla Road where Quarters 10/Building 267 are currently located, requiring their removal. Under Alternative 4, the westbound on-ramp would begin at South Gate Road, proceed east paralleling the eastbound on-ramp, loop under the new SFOBB transition structure near its eastern end to provide adequate merging distances, and cross over the westbound off-ramp along the north side of the Bay Bridge. The length of this ramp would be 2,884 feet. An HOV lane would not be provided. The westbound off-ramp would diverge from the new SFOBB transition structure, parallel the transition structure, cross under the westbound on-ramp, and terminate at a "T" intersection at North Gate Road. The length of this ramp would be 1,168 feet and a stop sign is proposed at the ramp terminus. An HOV lane would not be provided. Quarters 10/Building 267 and associated landscaping would remain in place. Total costs for Alternative 2b and Alternative 4 are estimated at $79 million and $159 million, respectively. The right-of-way capital costs include easements from the USCG for both alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Ramp replacement would increase traffic safety by improving the geometry and operations of the westbound on- and off-ramps. Temporarily disturbed woodland and forested areas would be restored after completion of construction activities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities would have temporary noise and traffic impacts including detours and single-lane closures. Three historic properties (Senior Officers Quarters Historic District, Quarters 1/Nimitz House, and Quarters 10/Building 267) would be adversely affected. Under Alternative 2b, Quarters 10/Building 267) would be acquired, removed, and relocated. Under Alternative 4, ramps would be directly above the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commissions 100-foot shoreline band. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and General Bridge Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 535). JF - EPA number: 110044, Volume I--688 pages and maps, Volume II--1,356 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Easements KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Islands KW - Military Facilities (Coast Guard) KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - California KW - San Francisco Bay KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - General Bridge Act of 1946, Coast Guard Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876253648?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=YERBA+BUENA+ISLAND+RAMPS+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT+ON+INTERSTATE+80+%28I-80%29%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=YERBA+BUENA+ISLAND+RAMPS+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT+ON+INTERSTATE+80+%28I-80%29%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - California Department of Transportation, Oakland, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - YERBA BUENA ISLAND RAMPS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ON INTERSTATE 80 (I-80), CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. [Part 11 of 14] T2 - YERBA BUENA ISLAND RAMPS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ON INTERSTATE 80 (I-80), CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. AN - 876246946; 14800-4_0011 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the existing westbound on-ramp and the westbound off-ramp connecting to Interstate 80 (I-80) on the eastern side of Yerba Buena Island (YBI), San Francisco, California is proposed. YBI is located in the San Francisco Bay, halfway between Oakland and San Francisco, and is accessible by vehicles only via the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge (SFOBB), which is part of I-80. The SFOBB is a critical link in the interstate network, providing access between San Francisco and the East Bay. YBI and Treasure Island, which lies to the north, are accessed by on-and off-ramps located on the upper and lower decks of the SFOBB. The SFOBB and the on- and off-ramps provide the only land access to the active U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) facilities located on the southern side of YBI. Geometric and operational deficiencies of the existing ramps have resulted in accident rates higher than the statewide rate for similar facilities and the westbound on-ramp merge lengths and off-ramp deceleration lengths do not meet current California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) standards. Projections of 2035 traffic volumes indicate ramp operations at a failing level of service in both the morning and evening peak hours. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives are evaluated in this draft EIS. Alternative 2b would include removal of the existing westbound on- and off-ramps, construction of a westbound hook on-ramp from Macalla Road, and construction of a westbound off-ramp to Macalla Road. The westbound on-ramp would begin at a "T" intersection at Macalla Road, loop right with a tight radius, and merge on to the north side of the Bay Bridge. The length of this ramp would be 867 feet and it would have two traffic lanes, merging into one as it connects to the SFOBB. One lane would be a high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane and the other a mixed-flow lane. The westbound off-ramp would diverge from the new SFOBB transition structure and terminate at a "T" intersection at Macalla Road. The length of this ramp would be 1,115 feet and a stop sign is proposed at the ramp terminus. Macalla Road would be widened for 662 feet adjacent to the terminus of the westbound on- and off-ramps to accommodate a future 12-foot-wide multi-use pedestrian/bike path and two 12-foot-wide lanes within the Caltrans right-of-way. A retaining wall would be constructed to provide the required width and retain the hillside above Macalla Road. The roadway width would vary around the curve at South Gate Road to provide proper width for truck turning movements. The westbound on- and off-ramps would terminate at Macalla Road where Quarters 10/Building 267 are currently located, requiring their removal. Under Alternative 4, the westbound on-ramp would begin at South Gate Road, proceed east paralleling the eastbound on-ramp, loop under the new SFOBB transition structure near its eastern end to provide adequate merging distances, and cross over the westbound off-ramp along the north side of the Bay Bridge. The length of this ramp would be 2,884 feet. An HOV lane would not be provided. The westbound off-ramp would diverge from the new SFOBB transition structure, parallel the transition structure, cross under the westbound on-ramp, and terminate at a "T" intersection at North Gate Road. The length of this ramp would be 1,168 feet and a stop sign is proposed at the ramp terminus. An HOV lane would not be provided. Quarters 10/Building 267 and associated landscaping would remain in place. Total costs for Alternative 2b and Alternative 4 are estimated at $79 million and $159 million, respectively. The right-of-way capital costs include easements from the USCG for both alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Ramp replacement would increase traffic safety by improving the geometry and operations of the westbound on- and off-ramps. Temporarily disturbed woodland and forested areas would be restored after completion of construction activities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities would have temporary noise and traffic impacts including detours and single-lane closures. Three historic properties (Senior Officers Quarters Historic District, Quarters 1/Nimitz House, and Quarters 10/Building 267) would be adversely affected. Under Alternative 2b, Quarters 10/Building 267) would be acquired, removed, and relocated. Under Alternative 4, ramps would be directly above the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commissions 100-foot shoreline band. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and General Bridge Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 535). JF - EPA number: 110044, Volume I--688 pages and maps, Volume II--1,356 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Easements KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Islands KW - Military Facilities (Coast Guard) KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - California KW - San Francisco Bay KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - General Bridge Act of 1946, Coast Guard Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876246946?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=YERBA+BUENA+ISLAND+RAMPS+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT+ON+INTERSTATE+80+%28I-80%29%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=YERBA+BUENA+ISLAND+RAMPS+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT+ON+INTERSTATE+80+%28I-80%29%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - California Department of Transportation, Oakland, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - YERBA BUENA ISLAND RAMPS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ON INTERSTATE 80 (I-80), CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. [Part 10 of 14] T2 - YERBA BUENA ISLAND RAMPS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ON INTERSTATE 80 (I-80), CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. AN - 876246941; 14800-4_0010 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the existing westbound on-ramp and the westbound off-ramp connecting to Interstate 80 (I-80) on the eastern side of Yerba Buena Island (YBI), San Francisco, California is proposed. YBI is located in the San Francisco Bay, halfway between Oakland and San Francisco, and is accessible by vehicles only via the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge (SFOBB), which is part of I-80. The SFOBB is a critical link in the interstate network, providing access between San Francisco and the East Bay. YBI and Treasure Island, which lies to the north, are accessed by on-and off-ramps located on the upper and lower decks of the SFOBB. The SFOBB and the on- and off-ramps provide the only land access to the active U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) facilities located on the southern side of YBI. Geometric and operational deficiencies of the existing ramps have resulted in accident rates higher than the statewide rate for similar facilities and the westbound on-ramp merge lengths and off-ramp deceleration lengths do not meet current California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) standards. Projections of 2035 traffic volumes indicate ramp operations at a failing level of service in both the morning and evening peak hours. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives are evaluated in this draft EIS. Alternative 2b would include removal of the existing westbound on- and off-ramps, construction of a westbound hook on-ramp from Macalla Road, and construction of a westbound off-ramp to Macalla Road. The westbound on-ramp would begin at a "T" intersection at Macalla Road, loop right with a tight radius, and merge on to the north side of the Bay Bridge. The length of this ramp would be 867 feet and it would have two traffic lanes, merging into one as it connects to the SFOBB. One lane would be a high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane and the other a mixed-flow lane. The westbound off-ramp would diverge from the new SFOBB transition structure and terminate at a "T" intersection at Macalla Road. The length of this ramp would be 1,115 feet and a stop sign is proposed at the ramp terminus. Macalla Road would be widened for 662 feet adjacent to the terminus of the westbound on- and off-ramps to accommodate a future 12-foot-wide multi-use pedestrian/bike path and two 12-foot-wide lanes within the Caltrans right-of-way. A retaining wall would be constructed to provide the required width and retain the hillside above Macalla Road. The roadway width would vary around the curve at South Gate Road to provide proper width for truck turning movements. The westbound on- and off-ramps would terminate at Macalla Road where Quarters 10/Building 267 are currently located, requiring their removal. Under Alternative 4, the westbound on-ramp would begin at South Gate Road, proceed east paralleling the eastbound on-ramp, loop under the new SFOBB transition structure near its eastern end to provide adequate merging distances, and cross over the westbound off-ramp along the north side of the Bay Bridge. The length of this ramp would be 2,884 feet. An HOV lane would not be provided. The westbound off-ramp would diverge from the new SFOBB transition structure, parallel the transition structure, cross under the westbound on-ramp, and terminate at a "T" intersection at North Gate Road. The length of this ramp would be 1,168 feet and a stop sign is proposed at the ramp terminus. An HOV lane would not be provided. Quarters 10/Building 267 and associated landscaping would remain in place. Total costs for Alternative 2b and Alternative 4 are estimated at $79 million and $159 million, respectively. The right-of-way capital costs include easements from the USCG for both alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Ramp replacement would increase traffic safety by improving the geometry and operations of the westbound on- and off-ramps. Temporarily disturbed woodland and forested areas would be restored after completion of construction activities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities would have temporary noise and traffic impacts including detours and single-lane closures. Three historic properties (Senior Officers Quarters Historic District, Quarters 1/Nimitz House, and Quarters 10/Building 267) would be adversely affected. Under Alternative 2b, Quarters 10/Building 267) would be acquired, removed, and relocated. Under Alternative 4, ramps would be directly above the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commissions 100-foot shoreline band. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and General Bridge Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 535). JF - EPA number: 110044, Volume I--688 pages and maps, Volume II--1,356 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Easements KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Islands KW - Military Facilities (Coast Guard) KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - California KW - San Francisco Bay KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - General Bridge Act of 1946, Coast Guard Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876246941?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=YERBA+BUENA+ISLAND+RAMPS+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT+ON+INTERSTATE+80+%28I-80%29%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=YERBA+BUENA+ISLAND+RAMPS+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT+ON+INTERSTATE+80+%28I-80%29%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - California Department of Transportation, Oakland, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 26 of 26] T2 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133990; 14807-1_0026 AB - PURPOSE: The establishment of a large-scale training range facility at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center (the Combat Center) at Twentynine Palms, California that would accommodate sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training for all elements of a Marine Expeditionary Brigade (MEB) is proposed. The Marine Corps would acquire additional land adjacent to the 600,000-acre Combat Center, establish and modify military special use airspace (SUA) above the proposed MEB-sized training range, and conduct the specified MEB training. The Combat Center is the place through which nearly all Marine Corps units rotate for training before deployment. While it has been the site of large-scale, combined-arms live-fire training in the past, it has insufficient land and airspace to meet MEB requirements. The Combat Center is located in the Mojave Desert in San Bernardino County 150 miles east of Los Angeles and 50 miles northeast of Palm Springs. The southern boundary of the installation is adjacent to the City of Twentynine Palms, six miles north of State Route 62. The northern boundary of the installation is located south of Interstate 40. The western boundary of the installation is adjacent to the Johnson Valley off-highway vehicle (OHV) area, which is administered by the Bureau of Land Management. The eastern boundary of the installation is located west of Amboy Road. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this draft EIS. Alternative 1 would involve exclusive year-around military use of the entire west study area; alternatives 2 and 6 would involve exclusive year-around military use of a portion of the west study area; and alternatives 4, 5, and 6 would permit some level of restricted public use in all or part of the west study area for 10 months of each year. All the action alternatives except Alternative 5 would also involve acquisition of the south study area for exclusive military use. Alternative 3 would involve acquisition of the east study area for exclusive year-around military use except for public use of Amboy Road. All six alternatives involve the establishment of new SUA and the modification of existing airspace. Only the Sundance Military Operations Area (MOA) would be subject to modification of existing lateral dimensions, which is proposed under all six alternatives. All other proposed modifications to existing SUA under any of the alternatives would involve changes in vertical dimensions and times of use only. Alternative 3 would also involve reclassifying two areas. Under all alternatives, acquired airspace would be returned to Federal Aviation Administration control to be made available for commercial and general aviation when not being used by the Marine Corps. Two MEB exercises involving sustained combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training would be conducted each year under all six of the action alternatives with one MEB exercise involving 10,000 to 15,000 Marines likely to occur every six months. For alternatives that involve year-around exclusive military control of all or part of the west or east study areas (Alternatives 1, 2, 3, and 6), MEB building block training (including smaller-scale live fire and maneuver operations by units up to a single battalion in size) would occur in these acquired exclusive military use areas during times of the year that MEB exercises are not being conducted. Alternative 6, which is the preferred alternative, would require the acquisition of 146,667 acres in the west study area and 21,304 acres in the south study area. The land acquired within the west study area in Johnson Valley would be divided into a 38,137-acre area that would be open for restricted public access and use during periods when the MEB exercise is not occurring, and a 108,530-acre area for exclusive military use. The communications infrastructure that supports current Combat Center range operations would be extended into any acquired land via the proposed installation of two or three communications towers. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The acquisition of land contiguous to existing Combat Center operating areas would provide a sufficient area for realistic MEB-sized, sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training that meets at least the minimum threshold level training requirements within appropriate margins of safety. The modification and establishment of SUA would enable full integration of MEB-sized aviation combat operations and both air- and ground-delivered live-fire ordnance use within appropriate margins of safety. Implementation of the preferred alternative would preserve some public access to acquired lands in Johnson Valley. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in significant, unmitigable impacts to: land use, as a result of incompatibility with the Johnson Valley OHV Area Management Plan; recreation, as a result of loss of access to and the use of 57 percent of the Johnson Valley OHV Area; airspace management, as a result of the adverse effects of the proposed new and modified SUA; and air quality, as a result of nitrogen oxide emissions. Training activities would also have potential adverse effects on desert tortoises including total potential take of between 154 and 714 federally threatened desert tortoises over the life of the project. JF - EPA number: 110051, Draft EIS--941 pages, Appendices-625 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 26 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Desert Land KW - Emissions KW - Helicopters KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Munitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Threatened Species (Animals) KW - Vegetation KW - Weapon Systems KW - Wildlife KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Mojave Desert UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133990?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Marine Corps Air Ground Task Force Training Command, Twentynine Palms, California; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 2009). [Part 7 of 16] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 2009). AN - 873133605; 14810-4_0007 AB - PURPOSE: Transit service improvements in the heavily-traveled Crenshaw Transit Corridor in Los Angeles County, California are proposed. The study area encompasses 33 square miles and portions of five jurisdictions: the cities of Los Angeles, Inglewood, Hawthorne, and El Segundo, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Three major interstate highways traverse the area including the Santa Monica Freeway and Glenn Anderson Freeway running east-west, and the San Diego Freeway which runs north-south. The Harbor Freeway parallels the corridor, running north-south immediately east of the area. A September 2009 draft EIS analyzed a No Build Alternative, a low-cost transportation system management (TSM) alternative, a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Alternative, and a Light Rail Transit (LRT) Alternative. In December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted LRT as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Station to the Exposition LRT line (under construction) at the Exposition/Crenshaw Boulevards intersection. The LRT alignment would be doubletracked and would be comprised of at-grade street, at-grade railroad, aerial, and below-grade sections. This supplemental draft EIS presents additional information pertaining to the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor Project, previously known as the Crenshaw Transit Corridor Project. Specifically, four new alternative maintenance facility sites are analyzed and historic resources and parklands are evaluated for the area of potential effects. The four new alternative maintenance facility sites include: 1) Site 14 - the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative, a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the City of Los Angeles; 2) Site 15 - the Manchester/Aviation Alternative, a 20.5-acre industrial use site located in the City of Inglewood; 3) Site 17 - the Marine/Redondo Beach Alternative, a 14.2-acre industrial use site located in the City of Redondo Beach; and 4) the Division 22 Northern Expansion Alternative, a 3.5-acre industrial use site located in the City of Hawthorne. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of an effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems affecting corridor residents and businesses by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. None of the maintenance site alternatives would result in the displacement of any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The Site 14, Site 15, Site 17, and Division 22 maintenance facility site alternatives would require acquisition of 12, 39, four, and four parcels, respectively. The displacement of businesses may result in the loss of five to 390 employees without the implementation of mitigation measures. There would be potential for indirect significant impacts to businesses that are airport-related or dependent if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Uniform Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0435D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110054, Supplemental Draft EIS--204 pages, Appendices--558 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Noise KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133605?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+SEPTEMBER+2009%29.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+SEPTEMBER+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 2009). [Part 6 of 16] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 2009). AN - 873133602; 14810-4_0006 AB - PURPOSE: Transit service improvements in the heavily-traveled Crenshaw Transit Corridor in Los Angeles County, California are proposed. The study area encompasses 33 square miles and portions of five jurisdictions: the cities of Los Angeles, Inglewood, Hawthorne, and El Segundo, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Three major interstate highways traverse the area including the Santa Monica Freeway and Glenn Anderson Freeway running east-west, and the San Diego Freeway which runs north-south. The Harbor Freeway parallels the corridor, running north-south immediately east of the area. A September 2009 draft EIS analyzed a No Build Alternative, a low-cost transportation system management (TSM) alternative, a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Alternative, and a Light Rail Transit (LRT) Alternative. In December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted LRT as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Station to the Exposition LRT line (under construction) at the Exposition/Crenshaw Boulevards intersection. The LRT alignment would be doubletracked and would be comprised of at-grade street, at-grade railroad, aerial, and below-grade sections. This supplemental draft EIS presents additional information pertaining to the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor Project, previously known as the Crenshaw Transit Corridor Project. Specifically, four new alternative maintenance facility sites are analyzed and historic resources and parklands are evaluated for the area of potential effects. The four new alternative maintenance facility sites include: 1) Site 14 - the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative, a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the City of Los Angeles; 2) Site 15 - the Manchester/Aviation Alternative, a 20.5-acre industrial use site located in the City of Inglewood; 3) Site 17 - the Marine/Redondo Beach Alternative, a 14.2-acre industrial use site located in the City of Redondo Beach; and 4) the Division 22 Northern Expansion Alternative, a 3.5-acre industrial use site located in the City of Hawthorne. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of an effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems affecting corridor residents and businesses by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. None of the maintenance site alternatives would result in the displacement of any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The Site 14, Site 15, Site 17, and Division 22 maintenance facility site alternatives would require acquisition of 12, 39, four, and four parcels, respectively. The displacement of businesses may result in the loss of five to 390 employees without the implementation of mitigation measures. There would be potential for indirect significant impacts to businesses that are airport-related or dependent if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Uniform Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0435D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110054, Supplemental Draft EIS--204 pages, Appendices--558 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Noise KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133602?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+SEPTEMBER+2009%29.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+SEPTEMBER+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 2009). [Part 5 of 16] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 2009). AN - 873133598; 14810-4_0005 AB - PURPOSE: Transit service improvements in the heavily-traveled Crenshaw Transit Corridor in Los Angeles County, California are proposed. The study area encompasses 33 square miles and portions of five jurisdictions: the cities of Los Angeles, Inglewood, Hawthorne, and El Segundo, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Three major interstate highways traverse the area including the Santa Monica Freeway and Glenn Anderson Freeway running east-west, and the San Diego Freeway which runs north-south. The Harbor Freeway parallels the corridor, running north-south immediately east of the area. A September 2009 draft EIS analyzed a No Build Alternative, a low-cost transportation system management (TSM) alternative, a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Alternative, and a Light Rail Transit (LRT) Alternative. In December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted LRT as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Station to the Exposition LRT line (under construction) at the Exposition/Crenshaw Boulevards intersection. The LRT alignment would be doubletracked and would be comprised of at-grade street, at-grade railroad, aerial, and below-grade sections. This supplemental draft EIS presents additional information pertaining to the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor Project, previously known as the Crenshaw Transit Corridor Project. Specifically, four new alternative maintenance facility sites are analyzed and historic resources and parklands are evaluated for the area of potential effects. The four new alternative maintenance facility sites include: 1) Site 14 - the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative, a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the City of Los Angeles; 2) Site 15 - the Manchester/Aviation Alternative, a 20.5-acre industrial use site located in the City of Inglewood; 3) Site 17 - the Marine/Redondo Beach Alternative, a 14.2-acre industrial use site located in the City of Redondo Beach; and 4) the Division 22 Northern Expansion Alternative, a 3.5-acre industrial use site located in the City of Hawthorne. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of an effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems affecting corridor residents and businesses by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. None of the maintenance site alternatives would result in the displacement of any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The Site 14, Site 15, Site 17, and Division 22 maintenance facility site alternatives would require acquisition of 12, 39, four, and four parcels, respectively. The displacement of businesses may result in the loss of five to 390 employees without the implementation of mitigation measures. There would be potential for indirect significant impacts to businesses that are airport-related or dependent if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Uniform Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0435D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110054, Supplemental Draft EIS--204 pages, Appendices--558 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Noise KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133598?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+SEPTEMBER+2009%29.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+SEPTEMBER+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 2009). [Part 4 of 16] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 2009). AN - 873133597; 14810-4_0004 AB - PURPOSE: Transit service improvements in the heavily-traveled Crenshaw Transit Corridor in Los Angeles County, California are proposed. The study area encompasses 33 square miles and portions of five jurisdictions: the cities of Los Angeles, Inglewood, Hawthorne, and El Segundo, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Three major interstate highways traverse the area including the Santa Monica Freeway and Glenn Anderson Freeway running east-west, and the San Diego Freeway which runs north-south. The Harbor Freeway parallels the corridor, running north-south immediately east of the area. A September 2009 draft EIS analyzed a No Build Alternative, a low-cost transportation system management (TSM) alternative, a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Alternative, and a Light Rail Transit (LRT) Alternative. In December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted LRT as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Station to the Exposition LRT line (under construction) at the Exposition/Crenshaw Boulevards intersection. The LRT alignment would be doubletracked and would be comprised of at-grade street, at-grade railroad, aerial, and below-grade sections. This supplemental draft EIS presents additional information pertaining to the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor Project, previously known as the Crenshaw Transit Corridor Project. Specifically, four new alternative maintenance facility sites are analyzed and historic resources and parklands are evaluated for the area of potential effects. The four new alternative maintenance facility sites include: 1) Site 14 - the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative, a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the City of Los Angeles; 2) Site 15 - the Manchester/Aviation Alternative, a 20.5-acre industrial use site located in the City of Inglewood; 3) Site 17 - the Marine/Redondo Beach Alternative, a 14.2-acre industrial use site located in the City of Redondo Beach; and 4) the Division 22 Northern Expansion Alternative, a 3.5-acre industrial use site located in the City of Hawthorne. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of an effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems affecting corridor residents and businesses by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. None of the maintenance site alternatives would result in the displacement of any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The Site 14, Site 15, Site 17, and Division 22 maintenance facility site alternatives would require acquisition of 12, 39, four, and four parcels, respectively. The displacement of businesses may result in the loss of five to 390 employees without the implementation of mitigation measures. There would be potential for indirect significant impacts to businesses that are airport-related or dependent if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Uniform Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0435D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110054, Supplemental Draft EIS--204 pages, Appendices--558 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Noise KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133597?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+SEPTEMBER+2009%29.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+SEPTEMBER+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 2009). [Part 3 of 16] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 2009). AN - 873133595; 14810-4_0003 AB - PURPOSE: Transit service improvements in the heavily-traveled Crenshaw Transit Corridor in Los Angeles County, California are proposed. The study area encompasses 33 square miles and portions of five jurisdictions: the cities of Los Angeles, Inglewood, Hawthorne, and El Segundo, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Three major interstate highways traverse the area including the Santa Monica Freeway and Glenn Anderson Freeway running east-west, and the San Diego Freeway which runs north-south. The Harbor Freeway parallels the corridor, running north-south immediately east of the area. A September 2009 draft EIS analyzed a No Build Alternative, a low-cost transportation system management (TSM) alternative, a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Alternative, and a Light Rail Transit (LRT) Alternative. In December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted LRT as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Station to the Exposition LRT line (under construction) at the Exposition/Crenshaw Boulevards intersection. The LRT alignment would be doubletracked and would be comprised of at-grade street, at-grade railroad, aerial, and below-grade sections. This supplemental draft EIS presents additional information pertaining to the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor Project, previously known as the Crenshaw Transit Corridor Project. Specifically, four new alternative maintenance facility sites are analyzed and historic resources and parklands are evaluated for the area of potential effects. The four new alternative maintenance facility sites include: 1) Site 14 - the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative, a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the City of Los Angeles; 2) Site 15 - the Manchester/Aviation Alternative, a 20.5-acre industrial use site located in the City of Inglewood; 3) Site 17 - the Marine/Redondo Beach Alternative, a 14.2-acre industrial use site located in the City of Redondo Beach; and 4) the Division 22 Northern Expansion Alternative, a 3.5-acre industrial use site located in the City of Hawthorne. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of an effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems affecting corridor residents and businesses by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. None of the maintenance site alternatives would result in the displacement of any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The Site 14, Site 15, Site 17, and Division 22 maintenance facility site alternatives would require acquisition of 12, 39, four, and four parcels, respectively. The displacement of businesses may result in the loss of five to 390 employees without the implementation of mitigation measures. There would be potential for indirect significant impacts to businesses that are airport-related or dependent if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Uniform Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0435D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110054, Supplemental Draft EIS--204 pages, Appendices--558 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Noise KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133595?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+SEPTEMBER+2009%29.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+SEPTEMBER+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 2009). [Part 2 of 16] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 2009). AN - 873133592; 14810-4_0002 AB - PURPOSE: Transit service improvements in the heavily-traveled Crenshaw Transit Corridor in Los Angeles County, California are proposed. The study area encompasses 33 square miles and portions of five jurisdictions: the cities of Los Angeles, Inglewood, Hawthorne, and El Segundo, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Three major interstate highways traverse the area including the Santa Monica Freeway and Glenn Anderson Freeway running east-west, and the San Diego Freeway which runs north-south. The Harbor Freeway parallels the corridor, running north-south immediately east of the area. A September 2009 draft EIS analyzed a No Build Alternative, a low-cost transportation system management (TSM) alternative, a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Alternative, and a Light Rail Transit (LRT) Alternative. In December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted LRT as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Station to the Exposition LRT line (under construction) at the Exposition/Crenshaw Boulevards intersection. The LRT alignment would be doubletracked and would be comprised of at-grade street, at-grade railroad, aerial, and below-grade sections. This supplemental draft EIS presents additional information pertaining to the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor Project, previously known as the Crenshaw Transit Corridor Project. Specifically, four new alternative maintenance facility sites are analyzed and historic resources and parklands are evaluated for the area of potential effects. The four new alternative maintenance facility sites include: 1) Site 14 - the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative, a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the City of Los Angeles; 2) Site 15 - the Manchester/Aviation Alternative, a 20.5-acre industrial use site located in the City of Inglewood; 3) Site 17 - the Marine/Redondo Beach Alternative, a 14.2-acre industrial use site located in the City of Redondo Beach; and 4) the Division 22 Northern Expansion Alternative, a 3.5-acre industrial use site located in the City of Hawthorne. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of an effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems affecting corridor residents and businesses by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. None of the maintenance site alternatives would result in the displacement of any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The Site 14, Site 15, Site 17, and Division 22 maintenance facility site alternatives would require acquisition of 12, 39, four, and four parcels, respectively. The displacement of businesses may result in the loss of five to 390 employees without the implementation of mitigation measures. There would be potential for indirect significant impacts to businesses that are airport-related or dependent if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Uniform Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0435D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110054, Supplemental Draft EIS--204 pages, Appendices--558 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Noise KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133592?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+SEPTEMBER+2009%29.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+SEPTEMBER+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 2009). [Part 1 of 16] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 2009). AN - 873133591; 14810-4_0001 AB - PURPOSE: Transit service improvements in the heavily-traveled Crenshaw Transit Corridor in Los Angeles County, California are proposed. The study area encompasses 33 square miles and portions of five jurisdictions: the cities of Los Angeles, Inglewood, Hawthorne, and El Segundo, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Three major interstate highways traverse the area including the Santa Monica Freeway and Glenn Anderson Freeway running east-west, and the San Diego Freeway which runs north-south. The Harbor Freeway parallels the corridor, running north-south immediately east of the area. A September 2009 draft EIS analyzed a No Build Alternative, a low-cost transportation system management (TSM) alternative, a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Alternative, and a Light Rail Transit (LRT) Alternative. In December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted LRT as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Station to the Exposition LRT line (under construction) at the Exposition/Crenshaw Boulevards intersection. The LRT alignment would be doubletracked and would be comprised of at-grade street, at-grade railroad, aerial, and below-grade sections. This supplemental draft EIS presents additional information pertaining to the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor Project, previously known as the Crenshaw Transit Corridor Project. Specifically, four new alternative maintenance facility sites are analyzed and historic resources and parklands are evaluated for the area of potential effects. The four new alternative maintenance facility sites include: 1) Site 14 - the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative, a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the City of Los Angeles; 2) Site 15 - the Manchester/Aviation Alternative, a 20.5-acre industrial use site located in the City of Inglewood; 3) Site 17 - the Marine/Redondo Beach Alternative, a 14.2-acre industrial use site located in the City of Redondo Beach; and 4) the Division 22 Northern Expansion Alternative, a 3.5-acre industrial use site located in the City of Hawthorne. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of an effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems affecting corridor residents and businesses by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. None of the maintenance site alternatives would result in the displacement of any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The Site 14, Site 15, Site 17, and Division 22 maintenance facility site alternatives would require acquisition of 12, 39, four, and four parcels, respectively. The displacement of businesses may result in the loss of five to 390 employees without the implementation of mitigation measures. There would be potential for indirect significant impacts to businesses that are airport-related or dependent if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Uniform Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0435D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110054, Supplemental Draft EIS--204 pages, Appendices--558 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Noise KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133591?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+SEPTEMBER+2009%29.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+SEPTEMBER+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 25 of 26] T2 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133432; 14807-1_0025 AB - PURPOSE: The establishment of a large-scale training range facility at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center (the Combat Center) at Twentynine Palms, California that would accommodate sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training for all elements of a Marine Expeditionary Brigade (MEB) is proposed. The Marine Corps would acquire additional land adjacent to the 600,000-acre Combat Center, establish and modify military special use airspace (SUA) above the proposed MEB-sized training range, and conduct the specified MEB training. The Combat Center is the place through which nearly all Marine Corps units rotate for training before deployment. While it has been the site of large-scale, combined-arms live-fire training in the past, it has insufficient land and airspace to meet MEB requirements. The Combat Center is located in the Mojave Desert in San Bernardino County 150 miles east of Los Angeles and 50 miles northeast of Palm Springs. The southern boundary of the installation is adjacent to the City of Twentynine Palms, six miles north of State Route 62. The northern boundary of the installation is located south of Interstate 40. The western boundary of the installation is adjacent to the Johnson Valley off-highway vehicle (OHV) area, which is administered by the Bureau of Land Management. The eastern boundary of the installation is located west of Amboy Road. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this draft EIS. Alternative 1 would involve exclusive year-around military use of the entire west study area; alternatives 2 and 6 would involve exclusive year-around military use of a portion of the west study area; and alternatives 4, 5, and 6 would permit some level of restricted public use in all or part of the west study area for 10 months of each year. All the action alternatives except Alternative 5 would also involve acquisition of the south study area for exclusive military use. Alternative 3 would involve acquisition of the east study area for exclusive year-around military use except for public use of Amboy Road. All six alternatives involve the establishment of new SUA and the modification of existing airspace. Only the Sundance Military Operations Area (MOA) would be subject to modification of existing lateral dimensions, which is proposed under all six alternatives. All other proposed modifications to existing SUA under any of the alternatives would involve changes in vertical dimensions and times of use only. Alternative 3 would also involve reclassifying two areas. Under all alternatives, acquired airspace would be returned to Federal Aviation Administration control to be made available for commercial and general aviation when not being used by the Marine Corps. Two MEB exercises involving sustained combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training would be conducted each year under all six of the action alternatives with one MEB exercise involving 10,000 to 15,000 Marines likely to occur every six months. For alternatives that involve year-around exclusive military control of all or part of the west or east study areas (Alternatives 1, 2, 3, and 6), MEB building block training (including smaller-scale live fire and maneuver operations by units up to a single battalion in size) would occur in these acquired exclusive military use areas during times of the year that MEB exercises are not being conducted. Alternative 6, which is the preferred alternative, would require the acquisition of 146,667 acres in the west study area and 21,304 acres in the south study area. The land acquired within the west study area in Johnson Valley would be divided into a 38,137-acre area that would be open for restricted public access and use during periods when the MEB exercise is not occurring, and a 108,530-acre area for exclusive military use. The communications infrastructure that supports current Combat Center range operations would be extended into any acquired land via the proposed installation of two or three communications towers. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The acquisition of land contiguous to existing Combat Center operating areas would provide a sufficient area for realistic MEB-sized, sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training that meets at least the minimum threshold level training requirements within appropriate margins of safety. The modification and establishment of SUA would enable full integration of MEB-sized aviation combat operations and both air- and ground-delivered live-fire ordnance use within appropriate margins of safety. Implementation of the preferred alternative would preserve some public access to acquired lands in Johnson Valley. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in significant, unmitigable impacts to: land use, as a result of incompatibility with the Johnson Valley OHV Area Management Plan; recreation, as a result of loss of access to and the use of 57 percent of the Johnson Valley OHV Area; airspace management, as a result of the adverse effects of the proposed new and modified SUA; and air quality, as a result of nitrogen oxide emissions. Training activities would also have potential adverse effects on desert tortoises including total potential take of between 154 and 714 federally threatened desert tortoises over the life of the project. JF - EPA number: 110051, Draft EIS--941 pages, Appendices-625 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 25 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Desert Land KW - Emissions KW - Helicopters KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Munitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Threatened Species (Animals) KW - Vegetation KW - Weapon Systems KW - Wildlife KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Mojave Desert UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133432?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Marine Corps Air Ground Task Force Training Command, Twentynine Palms, California; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 24 of 26] T2 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133428; 14807-1_0024 AB - PURPOSE: The establishment of a large-scale training range facility at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center (the Combat Center) at Twentynine Palms, California that would accommodate sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training for all elements of a Marine Expeditionary Brigade (MEB) is proposed. The Marine Corps would acquire additional land adjacent to the 600,000-acre Combat Center, establish and modify military special use airspace (SUA) above the proposed MEB-sized training range, and conduct the specified MEB training. The Combat Center is the place through which nearly all Marine Corps units rotate for training before deployment. While it has been the site of large-scale, combined-arms live-fire training in the past, it has insufficient land and airspace to meet MEB requirements. The Combat Center is located in the Mojave Desert in San Bernardino County 150 miles east of Los Angeles and 50 miles northeast of Palm Springs. The southern boundary of the installation is adjacent to the City of Twentynine Palms, six miles north of State Route 62. The northern boundary of the installation is located south of Interstate 40. The western boundary of the installation is adjacent to the Johnson Valley off-highway vehicle (OHV) area, which is administered by the Bureau of Land Management. The eastern boundary of the installation is located west of Amboy Road. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this draft EIS. Alternative 1 would involve exclusive year-around military use of the entire west study area; alternatives 2 and 6 would involve exclusive year-around military use of a portion of the west study area; and alternatives 4, 5, and 6 would permit some level of restricted public use in all or part of the west study area for 10 months of each year. All the action alternatives except Alternative 5 would also involve acquisition of the south study area for exclusive military use. Alternative 3 would involve acquisition of the east study area for exclusive year-around military use except for public use of Amboy Road. All six alternatives involve the establishment of new SUA and the modification of existing airspace. Only the Sundance Military Operations Area (MOA) would be subject to modification of existing lateral dimensions, which is proposed under all six alternatives. All other proposed modifications to existing SUA under any of the alternatives would involve changes in vertical dimensions and times of use only. Alternative 3 would also involve reclassifying two areas. Under all alternatives, acquired airspace would be returned to Federal Aviation Administration control to be made available for commercial and general aviation when not being used by the Marine Corps. Two MEB exercises involving sustained combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training would be conducted each year under all six of the action alternatives with one MEB exercise involving 10,000 to 15,000 Marines likely to occur every six months. For alternatives that involve year-around exclusive military control of all or part of the west or east study areas (Alternatives 1, 2, 3, and 6), MEB building block training (including smaller-scale live fire and maneuver operations by units up to a single battalion in size) would occur in these acquired exclusive military use areas during times of the year that MEB exercises are not being conducted. Alternative 6, which is the preferred alternative, would require the acquisition of 146,667 acres in the west study area and 21,304 acres in the south study area. The land acquired within the west study area in Johnson Valley would be divided into a 38,137-acre area that would be open for restricted public access and use during periods when the MEB exercise is not occurring, and a 108,530-acre area for exclusive military use. The communications infrastructure that supports current Combat Center range operations would be extended into any acquired land via the proposed installation of two or three communications towers. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The acquisition of land contiguous to existing Combat Center operating areas would provide a sufficient area for realistic MEB-sized, sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training that meets at least the minimum threshold level training requirements within appropriate margins of safety. The modification and establishment of SUA would enable full integration of MEB-sized aviation combat operations and both air- and ground-delivered live-fire ordnance use within appropriate margins of safety. Implementation of the preferred alternative would preserve some public access to acquired lands in Johnson Valley. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in significant, unmitigable impacts to: land use, as a result of incompatibility with the Johnson Valley OHV Area Management Plan; recreation, as a result of loss of access to and the use of 57 percent of the Johnson Valley OHV Area; airspace management, as a result of the adverse effects of the proposed new and modified SUA; and air quality, as a result of nitrogen oxide emissions. Training activities would also have potential adverse effects on desert tortoises including total potential take of between 154 and 714 federally threatened desert tortoises over the life of the project. JF - EPA number: 110051, Draft EIS--941 pages, Appendices-625 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 24 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Desert Land KW - Emissions KW - Helicopters KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Munitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Threatened Species (Animals) KW - Vegetation KW - Weapon Systems KW - Wildlife KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Mojave Desert UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133428?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Marine Corps Air Ground Task Force Training Command, Twentynine Palms, California; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 23 of 26] T2 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133423; 14807-1_0023 AB - PURPOSE: The establishment of a large-scale training range facility at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center (the Combat Center) at Twentynine Palms, California that would accommodate sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training for all elements of a Marine Expeditionary Brigade (MEB) is proposed. The Marine Corps would acquire additional land adjacent to the 600,000-acre Combat Center, establish and modify military special use airspace (SUA) above the proposed MEB-sized training range, and conduct the specified MEB training. The Combat Center is the place through which nearly all Marine Corps units rotate for training before deployment. While it has been the site of large-scale, combined-arms live-fire training in the past, it has insufficient land and airspace to meet MEB requirements. The Combat Center is located in the Mojave Desert in San Bernardino County 150 miles east of Los Angeles and 50 miles northeast of Palm Springs. The southern boundary of the installation is adjacent to the City of Twentynine Palms, six miles north of State Route 62. The northern boundary of the installation is located south of Interstate 40. The western boundary of the installation is adjacent to the Johnson Valley off-highway vehicle (OHV) area, which is administered by the Bureau of Land Management. The eastern boundary of the installation is located west of Amboy Road. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this draft EIS. Alternative 1 would involve exclusive year-around military use of the entire west study area; alternatives 2 and 6 would involve exclusive year-around military use of a portion of the west study area; and alternatives 4, 5, and 6 would permit some level of restricted public use in all or part of the west study area for 10 months of each year. All the action alternatives except Alternative 5 would also involve acquisition of the south study area for exclusive military use. Alternative 3 would involve acquisition of the east study area for exclusive year-around military use except for public use of Amboy Road. All six alternatives involve the establishment of new SUA and the modification of existing airspace. Only the Sundance Military Operations Area (MOA) would be subject to modification of existing lateral dimensions, which is proposed under all six alternatives. All other proposed modifications to existing SUA under any of the alternatives would involve changes in vertical dimensions and times of use only. Alternative 3 would also involve reclassifying two areas. Under all alternatives, acquired airspace would be returned to Federal Aviation Administration control to be made available for commercial and general aviation when not being used by the Marine Corps. Two MEB exercises involving sustained combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training would be conducted each year under all six of the action alternatives with one MEB exercise involving 10,000 to 15,000 Marines likely to occur every six months. For alternatives that involve year-around exclusive military control of all or part of the west or east study areas (Alternatives 1, 2, 3, and 6), MEB building block training (including smaller-scale live fire and maneuver operations by units up to a single battalion in size) would occur in these acquired exclusive military use areas during times of the year that MEB exercises are not being conducted. Alternative 6, which is the preferred alternative, would require the acquisition of 146,667 acres in the west study area and 21,304 acres in the south study area. The land acquired within the west study area in Johnson Valley would be divided into a 38,137-acre area that would be open for restricted public access and use during periods when the MEB exercise is not occurring, and a 108,530-acre area for exclusive military use. The communications infrastructure that supports current Combat Center range operations would be extended into any acquired land via the proposed installation of two or three communications towers. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The acquisition of land contiguous to existing Combat Center operating areas would provide a sufficient area for realistic MEB-sized, sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training that meets at least the minimum threshold level training requirements within appropriate margins of safety. The modification and establishment of SUA would enable full integration of MEB-sized aviation combat operations and both air- and ground-delivered live-fire ordnance use within appropriate margins of safety. Implementation of the preferred alternative would preserve some public access to acquired lands in Johnson Valley. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in significant, unmitigable impacts to: land use, as a result of incompatibility with the Johnson Valley OHV Area Management Plan; recreation, as a result of loss of access to and the use of 57 percent of the Johnson Valley OHV Area; airspace management, as a result of the adverse effects of the proposed new and modified SUA; and air quality, as a result of nitrogen oxide emissions. Training activities would also have potential adverse effects on desert tortoises including total potential take of between 154 and 714 federally threatened desert tortoises over the life of the project. JF - EPA number: 110051, Draft EIS--941 pages, Appendices-625 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 23 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Desert Land KW - Emissions KW - Helicopters KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Munitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Threatened Species (Animals) KW - Vegetation KW - Weapon Systems KW - Wildlife KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Mojave Desert UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133423?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Marine Corps Air Ground Task Force Training Command, Twentynine Palms, California; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 22 of 26] T2 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133416; 14807-1_0022 AB - PURPOSE: The establishment of a large-scale training range facility at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center (the Combat Center) at Twentynine Palms, California that would accommodate sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training for all elements of a Marine Expeditionary Brigade (MEB) is proposed. The Marine Corps would acquire additional land adjacent to the 600,000-acre Combat Center, establish and modify military special use airspace (SUA) above the proposed MEB-sized training range, and conduct the specified MEB training. The Combat Center is the place through which nearly all Marine Corps units rotate for training before deployment. While it has been the site of large-scale, combined-arms live-fire training in the past, it has insufficient land and airspace to meet MEB requirements. The Combat Center is located in the Mojave Desert in San Bernardino County 150 miles east of Los Angeles and 50 miles northeast of Palm Springs. The southern boundary of the installation is adjacent to the City of Twentynine Palms, six miles north of State Route 62. The northern boundary of the installation is located south of Interstate 40. The western boundary of the installation is adjacent to the Johnson Valley off-highway vehicle (OHV) area, which is administered by the Bureau of Land Management. The eastern boundary of the installation is located west of Amboy Road. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this draft EIS. Alternative 1 would involve exclusive year-around military use of the entire west study area; alternatives 2 and 6 would involve exclusive year-around military use of a portion of the west study area; and alternatives 4, 5, and 6 would permit some level of restricted public use in all or part of the west study area for 10 months of each year. All the action alternatives except Alternative 5 would also involve acquisition of the south study area for exclusive military use. Alternative 3 would involve acquisition of the east study area for exclusive year-around military use except for public use of Amboy Road. All six alternatives involve the establishment of new SUA and the modification of existing airspace. Only the Sundance Military Operations Area (MOA) would be subject to modification of existing lateral dimensions, which is proposed under all six alternatives. All other proposed modifications to existing SUA under any of the alternatives would involve changes in vertical dimensions and times of use only. Alternative 3 would also involve reclassifying two areas. Under all alternatives, acquired airspace would be returned to Federal Aviation Administration control to be made available for commercial and general aviation when not being used by the Marine Corps. Two MEB exercises involving sustained combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training would be conducted each year under all six of the action alternatives with one MEB exercise involving 10,000 to 15,000 Marines likely to occur every six months. For alternatives that involve year-around exclusive military control of all or part of the west or east study areas (Alternatives 1, 2, 3, and 6), MEB building block training (including smaller-scale live fire and maneuver operations by units up to a single battalion in size) would occur in these acquired exclusive military use areas during times of the year that MEB exercises are not being conducted. Alternative 6, which is the preferred alternative, would require the acquisition of 146,667 acres in the west study area and 21,304 acres in the south study area. The land acquired within the west study area in Johnson Valley would be divided into a 38,137-acre area that would be open for restricted public access and use during periods when the MEB exercise is not occurring, and a 108,530-acre area for exclusive military use. The communications infrastructure that supports current Combat Center range operations would be extended into any acquired land via the proposed installation of two or three communications towers. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The acquisition of land contiguous to existing Combat Center operating areas would provide a sufficient area for realistic MEB-sized, sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training that meets at least the minimum threshold level training requirements within appropriate margins of safety. The modification and establishment of SUA would enable full integration of MEB-sized aviation combat operations and both air- and ground-delivered live-fire ordnance use within appropriate margins of safety. Implementation of the preferred alternative would preserve some public access to acquired lands in Johnson Valley. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in significant, unmitigable impacts to: land use, as a result of incompatibility with the Johnson Valley OHV Area Management Plan; recreation, as a result of loss of access to and the use of 57 percent of the Johnson Valley OHV Area; airspace management, as a result of the adverse effects of the proposed new and modified SUA; and air quality, as a result of nitrogen oxide emissions. Training activities would also have potential adverse effects on desert tortoises including total potential take of between 154 and 714 federally threatened desert tortoises over the life of the project. JF - EPA number: 110051, Draft EIS--941 pages, Appendices-625 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 22 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Desert Land KW - Emissions KW - Helicopters KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Munitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Threatened Species (Animals) KW - Vegetation KW - Weapon Systems KW - Wildlife KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Mojave Desert UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133416?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Marine Corps Air Ground Task Force Training Command, Twentynine Palms, California; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 21 of 26] T2 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133411; 14807-1_0021 AB - PURPOSE: The establishment of a large-scale training range facility at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center (the Combat Center) at Twentynine Palms, California that would accommodate sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training for all elements of a Marine Expeditionary Brigade (MEB) is proposed. The Marine Corps would acquire additional land adjacent to the 600,000-acre Combat Center, establish and modify military special use airspace (SUA) above the proposed MEB-sized training range, and conduct the specified MEB training. The Combat Center is the place through which nearly all Marine Corps units rotate for training before deployment. While it has been the site of large-scale, combined-arms live-fire training in the past, it has insufficient land and airspace to meet MEB requirements. The Combat Center is located in the Mojave Desert in San Bernardino County 150 miles east of Los Angeles and 50 miles northeast of Palm Springs. The southern boundary of the installation is adjacent to the City of Twentynine Palms, six miles north of State Route 62. The northern boundary of the installation is located south of Interstate 40. The western boundary of the installation is adjacent to the Johnson Valley off-highway vehicle (OHV) area, which is administered by the Bureau of Land Management. The eastern boundary of the installation is located west of Amboy Road. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this draft EIS. Alternative 1 would involve exclusive year-around military use of the entire west study area; alternatives 2 and 6 would involve exclusive year-around military use of a portion of the west study area; and alternatives 4, 5, and 6 would permit some level of restricted public use in all or part of the west study area for 10 months of each year. All the action alternatives except Alternative 5 would also involve acquisition of the south study area for exclusive military use. Alternative 3 would involve acquisition of the east study area for exclusive year-around military use except for public use of Amboy Road. All six alternatives involve the establishment of new SUA and the modification of existing airspace. Only the Sundance Military Operations Area (MOA) would be subject to modification of existing lateral dimensions, which is proposed under all six alternatives. All other proposed modifications to existing SUA under any of the alternatives would involve changes in vertical dimensions and times of use only. Alternative 3 would also involve reclassifying two areas. Under all alternatives, acquired airspace would be returned to Federal Aviation Administration control to be made available for commercial and general aviation when not being used by the Marine Corps. Two MEB exercises involving sustained combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training would be conducted each year under all six of the action alternatives with one MEB exercise involving 10,000 to 15,000 Marines likely to occur every six months. For alternatives that involve year-around exclusive military control of all or part of the west or east study areas (Alternatives 1, 2, 3, and 6), MEB building block training (including smaller-scale live fire and maneuver operations by units up to a single battalion in size) would occur in these acquired exclusive military use areas during times of the year that MEB exercises are not being conducted. Alternative 6, which is the preferred alternative, would require the acquisition of 146,667 acres in the west study area and 21,304 acres in the south study area. The land acquired within the west study area in Johnson Valley would be divided into a 38,137-acre area that would be open for restricted public access and use during periods when the MEB exercise is not occurring, and a 108,530-acre area for exclusive military use. The communications infrastructure that supports current Combat Center range operations would be extended into any acquired land via the proposed installation of two or three communications towers. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The acquisition of land contiguous to existing Combat Center operating areas would provide a sufficient area for realistic MEB-sized, sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training that meets at least the minimum threshold level training requirements within appropriate margins of safety. The modification and establishment of SUA would enable full integration of MEB-sized aviation combat operations and both air- and ground-delivered live-fire ordnance use within appropriate margins of safety. Implementation of the preferred alternative would preserve some public access to acquired lands in Johnson Valley. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in significant, unmitigable impacts to: land use, as a result of incompatibility with the Johnson Valley OHV Area Management Plan; recreation, as a result of loss of access to and the use of 57 percent of the Johnson Valley OHV Area; airspace management, as a result of the adverse effects of the proposed new and modified SUA; and air quality, as a result of nitrogen oxide emissions. Training activities would also have potential adverse effects on desert tortoises including total potential take of between 154 and 714 federally threatened desert tortoises over the life of the project. JF - EPA number: 110051, Draft EIS--941 pages, Appendices-625 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 21 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Desert Land KW - Emissions KW - Helicopters KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Munitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Threatened Species (Animals) KW - Vegetation KW - Weapon Systems KW - Wildlife KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Mojave Desert UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133411?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Marine Corps Air Ground Task Force Training Command, Twentynine Palms, California; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 20 of 26] T2 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133404; 14807-1_0020 AB - PURPOSE: The establishment of a large-scale training range facility at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center (the Combat Center) at Twentynine Palms, California that would accommodate sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training for all elements of a Marine Expeditionary Brigade (MEB) is proposed. The Marine Corps would acquire additional land adjacent to the 600,000-acre Combat Center, establish and modify military special use airspace (SUA) above the proposed MEB-sized training range, and conduct the specified MEB training. The Combat Center is the place through which nearly all Marine Corps units rotate for training before deployment. While it has been the site of large-scale, combined-arms live-fire training in the past, it has insufficient land and airspace to meet MEB requirements. The Combat Center is located in the Mojave Desert in San Bernardino County 150 miles east of Los Angeles and 50 miles northeast of Palm Springs. The southern boundary of the installation is adjacent to the City of Twentynine Palms, six miles north of State Route 62. The northern boundary of the installation is located south of Interstate 40. The western boundary of the installation is adjacent to the Johnson Valley off-highway vehicle (OHV) area, which is administered by the Bureau of Land Management. The eastern boundary of the installation is located west of Amboy Road. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this draft EIS. Alternative 1 would involve exclusive year-around military use of the entire west study area; alternatives 2 and 6 would involve exclusive year-around military use of a portion of the west study area; and alternatives 4, 5, and 6 would permit some level of restricted public use in all or part of the west study area for 10 months of each year. All the action alternatives except Alternative 5 would also involve acquisition of the south study area for exclusive military use. Alternative 3 would involve acquisition of the east study area for exclusive year-around military use except for public use of Amboy Road. All six alternatives involve the establishment of new SUA and the modification of existing airspace. Only the Sundance Military Operations Area (MOA) would be subject to modification of existing lateral dimensions, which is proposed under all six alternatives. All other proposed modifications to existing SUA under any of the alternatives would involve changes in vertical dimensions and times of use only. Alternative 3 would also involve reclassifying two areas. Under all alternatives, acquired airspace would be returned to Federal Aviation Administration control to be made available for commercial and general aviation when not being used by the Marine Corps. Two MEB exercises involving sustained combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training would be conducted each year under all six of the action alternatives with one MEB exercise involving 10,000 to 15,000 Marines likely to occur every six months. For alternatives that involve year-around exclusive military control of all or part of the west or east study areas (Alternatives 1, 2, 3, and 6), MEB building block training (including smaller-scale live fire and maneuver operations by units up to a single battalion in size) would occur in these acquired exclusive military use areas during times of the year that MEB exercises are not being conducted. Alternative 6, which is the preferred alternative, would require the acquisition of 146,667 acres in the west study area and 21,304 acres in the south study area. The land acquired within the west study area in Johnson Valley would be divided into a 38,137-acre area that would be open for restricted public access and use during periods when the MEB exercise is not occurring, and a 108,530-acre area for exclusive military use. The communications infrastructure that supports current Combat Center range operations would be extended into any acquired land via the proposed installation of two or three communications towers. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The acquisition of land contiguous to existing Combat Center operating areas would provide a sufficient area for realistic MEB-sized, sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training that meets at least the minimum threshold level training requirements within appropriate margins of safety. The modification and establishment of SUA would enable full integration of MEB-sized aviation combat operations and both air- and ground-delivered live-fire ordnance use within appropriate margins of safety. Implementation of the preferred alternative would preserve some public access to acquired lands in Johnson Valley. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in significant, unmitigable impacts to: land use, as a result of incompatibility with the Johnson Valley OHV Area Management Plan; recreation, as a result of loss of access to and the use of 57 percent of the Johnson Valley OHV Area; airspace management, as a result of the adverse effects of the proposed new and modified SUA; and air quality, as a result of nitrogen oxide emissions. Training activities would also have potential adverse effects on desert tortoises including total potential take of between 154 and 714 federally threatened desert tortoises over the life of the project. JF - EPA number: 110051, Draft EIS--941 pages, Appendices-625 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 20 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Desert Land KW - Emissions KW - Helicopters KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Munitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Threatened Species (Animals) KW - Vegetation KW - Weapon Systems KW - Wildlife KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Mojave Desert UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133404?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Marine Corps Air Ground Task Force Training Command, Twentynine Palms, California; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 13 of 26] T2 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133403; 14807-1_0013 AB - PURPOSE: The establishment of a large-scale training range facility at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center (the Combat Center) at Twentynine Palms, California that would accommodate sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training for all elements of a Marine Expeditionary Brigade (MEB) is proposed. The Marine Corps would acquire additional land adjacent to the 600,000-acre Combat Center, establish and modify military special use airspace (SUA) above the proposed MEB-sized training range, and conduct the specified MEB training. The Combat Center is the place through which nearly all Marine Corps units rotate for training before deployment. While it has been the site of large-scale, combined-arms live-fire training in the past, it has insufficient land and airspace to meet MEB requirements. The Combat Center is located in the Mojave Desert in San Bernardino County 150 miles east of Los Angeles and 50 miles northeast of Palm Springs. The southern boundary of the installation is adjacent to the City of Twentynine Palms, six miles north of State Route 62. The northern boundary of the installation is located south of Interstate 40. The western boundary of the installation is adjacent to the Johnson Valley off-highway vehicle (OHV) area, which is administered by the Bureau of Land Management. The eastern boundary of the installation is located west of Amboy Road. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this draft EIS. Alternative 1 would involve exclusive year-around military use of the entire west study area; alternatives 2 and 6 would involve exclusive year-around military use of a portion of the west study area; and alternatives 4, 5, and 6 would permit some level of restricted public use in all or part of the west study area for 10 months of each year. All the action alternatives except Alternative 5 would also involve acquisition of the south study area for exclusive military use. Alternative 3 would involve acquisition of the east study area for exclusive year-around military use except for public use of Amboy Road. All six alternatives involve the establishment of new SUA and the modification of existing airspace. Only the Sundance Military Operations Area (MOA) would be subject to modification of existing lateral dimensions, which is proposed under all six alternatives. All other proposed modifications to existing SUA under any of the alternatives would involve changes in vertical dimensions and times of use only. Alternative 3 would also involve reclassifying two areas. Under all alternatives, acquired airspace would be returned to Federal Aviation Administration control to be made available for commercial and general aviation when not being used by the Marine Corps. Two MEB exercises involving sustained combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training would be conducted each year under all six of the action alternatives with one MEB exercise involving 10,000 to 15,000 Marines likely to occur every six months. For alternatives that involve year-around exclusive military control of all or part of the west or east study areas (Alternatives 1, 2, 3, and 6), MEB building block training (including smaller-scale live fire and maneuver operations by units up to a single battalion in size) would occur in these acquired exclusive military use areas during times of the year that MEB exercises are not being conducted. Alternative 6, which is the preferred alternative, would require the acquisition of 146,667 acres in the west study area and 21,304 acres in the south study area. The land acquired within the west study area in Johnson Valley would be divided into a 38,137-acre area that would be open for restricted public access and use during periods when the MEB exercise is not occurring, and a 108,530-acre area for exclusive military use. The communications infrastructure that supports current Combat Center range operations would be extended into any acquired land via the proposed installation of two or three communications towers. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The acquisition of land contiguous to existing Combat Center operating areas would provide a sufficient area for realistic MEB-sized, sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training that meets at least the minimum threshold level training requirements within appropriate margins of safety. The modification and establishment of SUA would enable full integration of MEB-sized aviation combat operations and both air- and ground-delivered live-fire ordnance use within appropriate margins of safety. Implementation of the preferred alternative would preserve some public access to acquired lands in Johnson Valley. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in significant, unmitigable impacts to: land use, as a result of incompatibility with the Johnson Valley OHV Area Management Plan; recreation, as a result of loss of access to and the use of 57 percent of the Johnson Valley OHV Area; airspace management, as a result of the adverse effects of the proposed new and modified SUA; and air quality, as a result of nitrogen oxide emissions. Training activities would also have potential adverse effects on desert tortoises including total potential take of between 154 and 714 federally threatened desert tortoises over the life of the project. JF - EPA number: 110051, Draft EIS--941 pages, Appendices-625 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 13 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Desert Land KW - Emissions KW - Helicopters KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Munitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Threatened Species (Animals) KW - Vegetation KW - Weapon Systems KW - Wildlife KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Mojave Desert UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133403?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Marine Corps Air Ground Task Force Training Command, Twentynine Palms, California; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 12 of 26] T2 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133401; 14807-1_0012 AB - PURPOSE: The establishment of a large-scale training range facility at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center (the Combat Center) at Twentynine Palms, California that would accommodate sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training for all elements of a Marine Expeditionary Brigade (MEB) is proposed. The Marine Corps would acquire additional land adjacent to the 600,000-acre Combat Center, establish and modify military special use airspace (SUA) above the proposed MEB-sized training range, and conduct the specified MEB training. The Combat Center is the place through which nearly all Marine Corps units rotate for training before deployment. While it has been the site of large-scale, combined-arms live-fire training in the past, it has insufficient land and airspace to meet MEB requirements. The Combat Center is located in the Mojave Desert in San Bernardino County 150 miles east of Los Angeles and 50 miles northeast of Palm Springs. The southern boundary of the installation is adjacent to the City of Twentynine Palms, six miles north of State Route 62. The northern boundary of the installation is located south of Interstate 40. The western boundary of the installation is adjacent to the Johnson Valley off-highway vehicle (OHV) area, which is administered by the Bureau of Land Management. The eastern boundary of the installation is located west of Amboy Road. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this draft EIS. Alternative 1 would involve exclusive year-around military use of the entire west study area; alternatives 2 and 6 would involve exclusive year-around military use of a portion of the west study area; and alternatives 4, 5, and 6 would permit some level of restricted public use in all or part of the west study area for 10 months of each year. All the action alternatives except Alternative 5 would also involve acquisition of the south study area for exclusive military use. Alternative 3 would involve acquisition of the east study area for exclusive year-around military use except for public use of Amboy Road. All six alternatives involve the establishment of new SUA and the modification of existing airspace. Only the Sundance Military Operations Area (MOA) would be subject to modification of existing lateral dimensions, which is proposed under all six alternatives. All other proposed modifications to existing SUA under any of the alternatives would involve changes in vertical dimensions and times of use only. Alternative 3 would also involve reclassifying two areas. Under all alternatives, acquired airspace would be returned to Federal Aviation Administration control to be made available for commercial and general aviation when not being used by the Marine Corps. Two MEB exercises involving sustained combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training would be conducted each year under all six of the action alternatives with one MEB exercise involving 10,000 to 15,000 Marines likely to occur every six months. For alternatives that involve year-around exclusive military control of all or part of the west or east study areas (Alternatives 1, 2, 3, and 6), MEB building block training (including smaller-scale live fire and maneuver operations by units up to a single battalion in size) would occur in these acquired exclusive military use areas during times of the year that MEB exercises are not being conducted. Alternative 6, which is the preferred alternative, would require the acquisition of 146,667 acres in the west study area and 21,304 acres in the south study area. The land acquired within the west study area in Johnson Valley would be divided into a 38,137-acre area that would be open for restricted public access and use during periods when the MEB exercise is not occurring, and a 108,530-acre area for exclusive military use. The communications infrastructure that supports current Combat Center range operations would be extended into any acquired land via the proposed installation of two or three communications towers. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The acquisition of land contiguous to existing Combat Center operating areas would provide a sufficient area for realistic MEB-sized, sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training that meets at least the minimum threshold level training requirements within appropriate margins of safety. The modification and establishment of SUA would enable full integration of MEB-sized aviation combat operations and both air- and ground-delivered live-fire ordnance use within appropriate margins of safety. Implementation of the preferred alternative would preserve some public access to acquired lands in Johnson Valley. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in significant, unmitigable impacts to: land use, as a result of incompatibility with the Johnson Valley OHV Area Management Plan; recreation, as a result of loss of access to and the use of 57 percent of the Johnson Valley OHV Area; airspace management, as a result of the adverse effects of the proposed new and modified SUA; and air quality, as a result of nitrogen oxide emissions. Training activities would also have potential adverse effects on desert tortoises including total potential take of between 154 and 714 federally threatened desert tortoises over the life of the project. JF - EPA number: 110051, Draft EIS--941 pages, Appendices-625 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 12 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Desert Land KW - Emissions KW - Helicopters KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Munitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Threatened Species (Animals) KW - Vegetation KW - Weapon Systems KW - Wildlife KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Mojave Desert UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133401?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Marine Corps Air Ground Task Force Training Command, Twentynine Palms, California; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 11 of 26] T2 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133397; 14807-1_0011 AB - PURPOSE: The establishment of a large-scale training range facility at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center (the Combat Center) at Twentynine Palms, California that would accommodate sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training for all elements of a Marine Expeditionary Brigade (MEB) is proposed. The Marine Corps would acquire additional land adjacent to the 600,000-acre Combat Center, establish and modify military special use airspace (SUA) above the proposed MEB-sized training range, and conduct the specified MEB training. The Combat Center is the place through which nearly all Marine Corps units rotate for training before deployment. While it has been the site of large-scale, combined-arms live-fire training in the past, it has insufficient land and airspace to meet MEB requirements. The Combat Center is located in the Mojave Desert in San Bernardino County 150 miles east of Los Angeles and 50 miles northeast of Palm Springs. The southern boundary of the installation is adjacent to the City of Twentynine Palms, six miles north of State Route 62. The northern boundary of the installation is located south of Interstate 40. The western boundary of the installation is adjacent to the Johnson Valley off-highway vehicle (OHV) area, which is administered by the Bureau of Land Management. The eastern boundary of the installation is located west of Amboy Road. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this draft EIS. Alternative 1 would involve exclusive year-around military use of the entire west study area; alternatives 2 and 6 would involve exclusive year-around military use of a portion of the west study area; and alternatives 4, 5, and 6 would permit some level of restricted public use in all or part of the west study area for 10 months of each year. All the action alternatives except Alternative 5 would also involve acquisition of the south study area for exclusive military use. Alternative 3 would involve acquisition of the east study area for exclusive year-around military use except for public use of Amboy Road. All six alternatives involve the establishment of new SUA and the modification of existing airspace. Only the Sundance Military Operations Area (MOA) would be subject to modification of existing lateral dimensions, which is proposed under all six alternatives. All other proposed modifications to existing SUA under any of the alternatives would involve changes in vertical dimensions and times of use only. Alternative 3 would also involve reclassifying two areas. Under all alternatives, acquired airspace would be returned to Federal Aviation Administration control to be made available for commercial and general aviation when not being used by the Marine Corps. Two MEB exercises involving sustained combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training would be conducted each year under all six of the action alternatives with one MEB exercise involving 10,000 to 15,000 Marines likely to occur every six months. For alternatives that involve year-around exclusive military control of all or part of the west or east study areas (Alternatives 1, 2, 3, and 6), MEB building block training (including smaller-scale live fire and maneuver operations by units up to a single battalion in size) would occur in these acquired exclusive military use areas during times of the year that MEB exercises are not being conducted. Alternative 6, which is the preferred alternative, would require the acquisition of 146,667 acres in the west study area and 21,304 acres in the south study area. The land acquired within the west study area in Johnson Valley would be divided into a 38,137-acre area that would be open for restricted public access and use during periods when the MEB exercise is not occurring, and a 108,530-acre area for exclusive military use. The communications infrastructure that supports current Combat Center range operations would be extended into any acquired land via the proposed installation of two or three communications towers. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The acquisition of land contiguous to existing Combat Center operating areas would provide a sufficient area for realistic MEB-sized, sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training that meets at least the minimum threshold level training requirements within appropriate margins of safety. The modification and establishment of SUA would enable full integration of MEB-sized aviation combat operations and both air- and ground-delivered live-fire ordnance use within appropriate margins of safety. Implementation of the preferred alternative would preserve some public access to acquired lands in Johnson Valley. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in significant, unmitigable impacts to: land use, as a result of incompatibility with the Johnson Valley OHV Area Management Plan; recreation, as a result of loss of access to and the use of 57 percent of the Johnson Valley OHV Area; airspace management, as a result of the adverse effects of the proposed new and modified SUA; and air quality, as a result of nitrogen oxide emissions. Training activities would also have potential adverse effects on desert tortoises including total potential take of between 154 and 714 federally threatened desert tortoises over the life of the project. JF - EPA number: 110051, Draft EIS--941 pages, Appendices-625 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 11 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Desert Land KW - Emissions KW - Helicopters KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Munitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Threatened Species (Animals) KW - Vegetation KW - Weapon Systems KW - Wildlife KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Mojave Desert UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133397?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Marine Corps Air Ground Task Force Training Command, Twentynine Palms, California; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 10 of 26] T2 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133391; 14807-1_0010 AB - PURPOSE: The establishment of a large-scale training range facility at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center (the Combat Center) at Twentynine Palms, California that would accommodate sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training for all elements of a Marine Expeditionary Brigade (MEB) is proposed. The Marine Corps would acquire additional land adjacent to the 600,000-acre Combat Center, establish and modify military special use airspace (SUA) above the proposed MEB-sized training range, and conduct the specified MEB training. The Combat Center is the place through which nearly all Marine Corps units rotate for training before deployment. While it has been the site of large-scale, combined-arms live-fire training in the past, it has insufficient land and airspace to meet MEB requirements. The Combat Center is located in the Mojave Desert in San Bernardino County 150 miles east of Los Angeles and 50 miles northeast of Palm Springs. The southern boundary of the installation is adjacent to the City of Twentynine Palms, six miles north of State Route 62. The northern boundary of the installation is located south of Interstate 40. The western boundary of the installation is adjacent to the Johnson Valley off-highway vehicle (OHV) area, which is administered by the Bureau of Land Management. The eastern boundary of the installation is located west of Amboy Road. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this draft EIS. Alternative 1 would involve exclusive year-around military use of the entire west study area; alternatives 2 and 6 would involve exclusive year-around military use of a portion of the west study area; and alternatives 4, 5, and 6 would permit some level of restricted public use in all or part of the west study area for 10 months of each year. All the action alternatives except Alternative 5 would also involve acquisition of the south study area for exclusive military use. Alternative 3 would involve acquisition of the east study area for exclusive year-around military use except for public use of Amboy Road. All six alternatives involve the establishment of new SUA and the modification of existing airspace. Only the Sundance Military Operations Area (MOA) would be subject to modification of existing lateral dimensions, which is proposed under all six alternatives. All other proposed modifications to existing SUA under any of the alternatives would involve changes in vertical dimensions and times of use only. Alternative 3 would also involve reclassifying two areas. Under all alternatives, acquired airspace would be returned to Federal Aviation Administration control to be made available for commercial and general aviation when not being used by the Marine Corps. Two MEB exercises involving sustained combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training would be conducted each year under all six of the action alternatives with one MEB exercise involving 10,000 to 15,000 Marines likely to occur every six months. For alternatives that involve year-around exclusive military control of all or part of the west or east study areas (Alternatives 1, 2, 3, and 6), MEB building block training (including smaller-scale live fire and maneuver operations by units up to a single battalion in size) would occur in these acquired exclusive military use areas during times of the year that MEB exercises are not being conducted. Alternative 6, which is the preferred alternative, would require the acquisition of 146,667 acres in the west study area and 21,304 acres in the south study area. The land acquired within the west study area in Johnson Valley would be divided into a 38,137-acre area that would be open for restricted public access and use during periods when the MEB exercise is not occurring, and a 108,530-acre area for exclusive military use. The communications infrastructure that supports current Combat Center range operations would be extended into any acquired land via the proposed installation of two or three communications towers. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The acquisition of land contiguous to existing Combat Center operating areas would provide a sufficient area for realistic MEB-sized, sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training that meets at least the minimum threshold level training requirements within appropriate margins of safety. The modification and establishment of SUA would enable full integration of MEB-sized aviation combat operations and both air- and ground-delivered live-fire ordnance use within appropriate margins of safety. Implementation of the preferred alternative would preserve some public access to acquired lands in Johnson Valley. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in significant, unmitigable impacts to: land use, as a result of incompatibility with the Johnson Valley OHV Area Management Plan; recreation, as a result of loss of access to and the use of 57 percent of the Johnson Valley OHV Area; airspace management, as a result of the adverse effects of the proposed new and modified SUA; and air quality, as a result of nitrogen oxide emissions. Training activities would also have potential adverse effects on desert tortoises including total potential take of between 154 and 714 federally threatened desert tortoises over the life of the project. JF - EPA number: 110051, Draft EIS--941 pages, Appendices-625 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 10 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Desert Land KW - Emissions KW - Helicopters KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Munitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Threatened Species (Animals) KW - Vegetation KW - Weapon Systems KW - Wildlife KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Mojave Desert UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133391?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Marine Corps Air Ground Task Force Training Command, Twentynine Palms, California; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 9 of 26] T2 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133384; 14807-1_0009 AB - PURPOSE: The establishment of a large-scale training range facility at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center (the Combat Center) at Twentynine Palms, California that would accommodate sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training for all elements of a Marine Expeditionary Brigade (MEB) is proposed. The Marine Corps would acquire additional land adjacent to the 600,000-acre Combat Center, establish and modify military special use airspace (SUA) above the proposed MEB-sized training range, and conduct the specified MEB training. The Combat Center is the place through which nearly all Marine Corps units rotate for training before deployment. While it has been the site of large-scale, combined-arms live-fire training in the past, it has insufficient land and airspace to meet MEB requirements. The Combat Center is located in the Mojave Desert in San Bernardino County 150 miles east of Los Angeles and 50 miles northeast of Palm Springs. The southern boundary of the installation is adjacent to the City of Twentynine Palms, six miles north of State Route 62. The northern boundary of the installation is located south of Interstate 40. The western boundary of the installation is adjacent to the Johnson Valley off-highway vehicle (OHV) area, which is administered by the Bureau of Land Management. The eastern boundary of the installation is located west of Amboy Road. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this draft EIS. Alternative 1 would involve exclusive year-around military use of the entire west study area; alternatives 2 and 6 would involve exclusive year-around military use of a portion of the west study area; and alternatives 4, 5, and 6 would permit some level of restricted public use in all or part of the west study area for 10 months of each year. All the action alternatives except Alternative 5 would also involve acquisition of the south study area for exclusive military use. Alternative 3 would involve acquisition of the east study area for exclusive year-around military use except for public use of Amboy Road. All six alternatives involve the establishment of new SUA and the modification of existing airspace. Only the Sundance Military Operations Area (MOA) would be subject to modification of existing lateral dimensions, which is proposed under all six alternatives. All other proposed modifications to existing SUA under any of the alternatives would involve changes in vertical dimensions and times of use only. Alternative 3 would also involve reclassifying two areas. Under all alternatives, acquired airspace would be returned to Federal Aviation Administration control to be made available for commercial and general aviation when not being used by the Marine Corps. Two MEB exercises involving sustained combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training would be conducted each year under all six of the action alternatives with one MEB exercise involving 10,000 to 15,000 Marines likely to occur every six months. For alternatives that involve year-around exclusive military control of all or part of the west or east study areas (Alternatives 1, 2, 3, and 6), MEB building block training (including smaller-scale live fire and maneuver operations by units up to a single battalion in size) would occur in these acquired exclusive military use areas during times of the year that MEB exercises are not being conducted. Alternative 6, which is the preferred alternative, would require the acquisition of 146,667 acres in the west study area and 21,304 acres in the south study area. The land acquired within the west study area in Johnson Valley would be divided into a 38,137-acre area that would be open for restricted public access and use during periods when the MEB exercise is not occurring, and a 108,530-acre area for exclusive military use. The communications infrastructure that supports current Combat Center range operations would be extended into any acquired land via the proposed installation of two or three communications towers. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The acquisition of land contiguous to existing Combat Center operating areas would provide a sufficient area for realistic MEB-sized, sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training that meets at least the minimum threshold level training requirements within appropriate margins of safety. The modification and establishment of SUA would enable full integration of MEB-sized aviation combat operations and both air- and ground-delivered live-fire ordnance use within appropriate margins of safety. Implementation of the preferred alternative would preserve some public access to acquired lands in Johnson Valley. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in significant, unmitigable impacts to: land use, as a result of incompatibility with the Johnson Valley OHV Area Management Plan; recreation, as a result of loss of access to and the use of 57 percent of the Johnson Valley OHV Area; airspace management, as a result of the adverse effects of the proposed new and modified SUA; and air quality, as a result of nitrogen oxide emissions. Training activities would also have potential adverse effects on desert tortoises including total potential take of between 154 and 714 federally threatened desert tortoises over the life of the project. JF - EPA number: 110051, Draft EIS--941 pages, Appendices-625 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 9 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Desert Land KW - Emissions KW - Helicopters KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Munitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Threatened Species (Animals) KW - Vegetation KW - Weapon Systems KW - Wildlife KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Mojave Desert UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133384?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Marine Corps Air Ground Task Force Training Command, Twentynine Palms, California; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 8 of 26] T2 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133377; 14807-1_0008 AB - PURPOSE: The establishment of a large-scale training range facility at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center (the Combat Center) at Twentynine Palms, California that would accommodate sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training for all elements of a Marine Expeditionary Brigade (MEB) is proposed. The Marine Corps would acquire additional land adjacent to the 600,000-acre Combat Center, establish and modify military special use airspace (SUA) above the proposed MEB-sized training range, and conduct the specified MEB training. The Combat Center is the place through which nearly all Marine Corps units rotate for training before deployment. While it has been the site of large-scale, combined-arms live-fire training in the past, it has insufficient land and airspace to meet MEB requirements. The Combat Center is located in the Mojave Desert in San Bernardino County 150 miles east of Los Angeles and 50 miles northeast of Palm Springs. The southern boundary of the installation is adjacent to the City of Twentynine Palms, six miles north of State Route 62. The northern boundary of the installation is located south of Interstate 40. The western boundary of the installation is adjacent to the Johnson Valley off-highway vehicle (OHV) area, which is administered by the Bureau of Land Management. The eastern boundary of the installation is located west of Amboy Road. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this draft EIS. Alternative 1 would involve exclusive year-around military use of the entire west study area; alternatives 2 and 6 would involve exclusive year-around military use of a portion of the west study area; and alternatives 4, 5, and 6 would permit some level of restricted public use in all or part of the west study area for 10 months of each year. All the action alternatives except Alternative 5 would also involve acquisition of the south study area for exclusive military use. Alternative 3 would involve acquisition of the east study area for exclusive year-around military use except for public use of Amboy Road. All six alternatives involve the establishment of new SUA and the modification of existing airspace. Only the Sundance Military Operations Area (MOA) would be subject to modification of existing lateral dimensions, which is proposed under all six alternatives. All other proposed modifications to existing SUA under any of the alternatives would involve changes in vertical dimensions and times of use only. Alternative 3 would also involve reclassifying two areas. Under all alternatives, acquired airspace would be returned to Federal Aviation Administration control to be made available for commercial and general aviation when not being used by the Marine Corps. Two MEB exercises involving sustained combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training would be conducted each year under all six of the action alternatives with one MEB exercise involving 10,000 to 15,000 Marines likely to occur every six months. For alternatives that involve year-around exclusive military control of all or part of the west or east study areas (Alternatives 1, 2, 3, and 6), MEB building block training (including smaller-scale live fire and maneuver operations by units up to a single battalion in size) would occur in these acquired exclusive military use areas during times of the year that MEB exercises are not being conducted. Alternative 6, which is the preferred alternative, would require the acquisition of 146,667 acres in the west study area and 21,304 acres in the south study area. The land acquired within the west study area in Johnson Valley would be divided into a 38,137-acre area that would be open for restricted public access and use during periods when the MEB exercise is not occurring, and a 108,530-acre area for exclusive military use. The communications infrastructure that supports current Combat Center range operations would be extended into any acquired land via the proposed installation of two or three communications towers. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The acquisition of land contiguous to existing Combat Center operating areas would provide a sufficient area for realistic MEB-sized, sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training that meets at least the minimum threshold level training requirements within appropriate margins of safety. The modification and establishment of SUA would enable full integration of MEB-sized aviation combat operations and both air- and ground-delivered live-fire ordnance use within appropriate margins of safety. Implementation of the preferred alternative would preserve some public access to acquired lands in Johnson Valley. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in significant, unmitigable impacts to: land use, as a result of incompatibility with the Johnson Valley OHV Area Management Plan; recreation, as a result of loss of access to and the use of 57 percent of the Johnson Valley OHV Area; airspace management, as a result of the adverse effects of the proposed new and modified SUA; and air quality, as a result of nitrogen oxide emissions. Training activities would also have potential adverse effects on desert tortoises including total potential take of between 154 and 714 federally threatened desert tortoises over the life of the project. JF - EPA number: 110051, Draft EIS--941 pages, Appendices-625 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 8 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Desert Land KW - Emissions KW - Helicopters KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Munitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Threatened Species (Animals) KW - Vegetation KW - Weapon Systems KW - Wildlife KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Mojave Desert UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133377?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Marine Corps Air Ground Task Force Training Command, Twentynine Palms, California; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 4 of 26] T2 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133366; 14807-1_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The establishment of a large-scale training range facility at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center (the Combat Center) at Twentynine Palms, California that would accommodate sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training for all elements of a Marine Expeditionary Brigade (MEB) is proposed. The Marine Corps would acquire additional land adjacent to the 600,000-acre Combat Center, establish and modify military special use airspace (SUA) above the proposed MEB-sized training range, and conduct the specified MEB training. The Combat Center is the place through which nearly all Marine Corps units rotate for training before deployment. While it has been the site of large-scale, combined-arms live-fire training in the past, it has insufficient land and airspace to meet MEB requirements. The Combat Center is located in the Mojave Desert in San Bernardino County 150 miles east of Los Angeles and 50 miles northeast of Palm Springs. The southern boundary of the installation is adjacent to the City of Twentynine Palms, six miles north of State Route 62. The northern boundary of the installation is located south of Interstate 40. The western boundary of the installation is adjacent to the Johnson Valley off-highway vehicle (OHV) area, which is administered by the Bureau of Land Management. The eastern boundary of the installation is located west of Amboy Road. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this draft EIS. Alternative 1 would involve exclusive year-around military use of the entire west study area; alternatives 2 and 6 would involve exclusive year-around military use of a portion of the west study area; and alternatives 4, 5, and 6 would permit some level of restricted public use in all or part of the west study area for 10 months of each year. All the action alternatives except Alternative 5 would also involve acquisition of the south study area for exclusive military use. Alternative 3 would involve acquisition of the east study area for exclusive year-around military use except for public use of Amboy Road. All six alternatives involve the establishment of new SUA and the modification of existing airspace. Only the Sundance Military Operations Area (MOA) would be subject to modification of existing lateral dimensions, which is proposed under all six alternatives. All other proposed modifications to existing SUA under any of the alternatives would involve changes in vertical dimensions and times of use only. Alternative 3 would also involve reclassifying two areas. Under all alternatives, acquired airspace would be returned to Federal Aviation Administration control to be made available for commercial and general aviation when not being used by the Marine Corps. Two MEB exercises involving sustained combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training would be conducted each year under all six of the action alternatives with one MEB exercise involving 10,000 to 15,000 Marines likely to occur every six months. For alternatives that involve year-around exclusive military control of all or part of the west or east study areas (Alternatives 1, 2, 3, and 6), MEB building block training (including smaller-scale live fire and maneuver operations by units up to a single battalion in size) would occur in these acquired exclusive military use areas during times of the year that MEB exercises are not being conducted. Alternative 6, which is the preferred alternative, would require the acquisition of 146,667 acres in the west study area and 21,304 acres in the south study area. The land acquired within the west study area in Johnson Valley would be divided into a 38,137-acre area that would be open for restricted public access and use during periods when the MEB exercise is not occurring, and a 108,530-acre area for exclusive military use. The communications infrastructure that supports current Combat Center range operations would be extended into any acquired land via the proposed installation of two or three communications towers. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The acquisition of land contiguous to existing Combat Center operating areas would provide a sufficient area for realistic MEB-sized, sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training that meets at least the minimum threshold level training requirements within appropriate margins of safety. The modification and establishment of SUA would enable full integration of MEB-sized aviation combat operations and both air- and ground-delivered live-fire ordnance use within appropriate margins of safety. Implementation of the preferred alternative would preserve some public access to acquired lands in Johnson Valley. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in significant, unmitigable impacts to: land use, as a result of incompatibility with the Johnson Valley OHV Area Management Plan; recreation, as a result of loss of access to and the use of 57 percent of the Johnson Valley OHV Area; airspace management, as a result of the adverse effects of the proposed new and modified SUA; and air quality, as a result of nitrogen oxide emissions. Training activities would also have potential adverse effects on desert tortoises including total potential take of between 154 and 714 federally threatened desert tortoises over the life of the project. JF - EPA number: 110051, Draft EIS--941 pages, Appendices-625 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 4 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Desert Land KW - Emissions KW - Helicopters KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Munitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Threatened Species (Animals) KW - Vegetation KW - Weapon Systems KW - Wildlife KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Mojave Desert UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133366?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Marine Corps Air Ground Task Force Training Command, Twentynine Palms, California; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 2009). [Part 16 of 16] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 2009). AN - 873133182; 14810-4_0016 AB - PURPOSE: Transit service improvements in the heavily-traveled Crenshaw Transit Corridor in Los Angeles County, California are proposed. The study area encompasses 33 square miles and portions of five jurisdictions: the cities of Los Angeles, Inglewood, Hawthorne, and El Segundo, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Three major interstate highways traverse the area including the Santa Monica Freeway and Glenn Anderson Freeway running east-west, and the San Diego Freeway which runs north-south. The Harbor Freeway parallels the corridor, running north-south immediately east of the area. A September 2009 draft EIS analyzed a No Build Alternative, a low-cost transportation system management (TSM) alternative, a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Alternative, and a Light Rail Transit (LRT) Alternative. In December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted LRT as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Station to the Exposition LRT line (under construction) at the Exposition/Crenshaw Boulevards intersection. The LRT alignment would be doubletracked and would be comprised of at-grade street, at-grade railroad, aerial, and below-grade sections. This supplemental draft EIS presents additional information pertaining to the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor Project, previously known as the Crenshaw Transit Corridor Project. Specifically, four new alternative maintenance facility sites are analyzed and historic resources and parklands are evaluated for the area of potential effects. The four new alternative maintenance facility sites include: 1) Site 14 - the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative, a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the City of Los Angeles; 2) Site 15 - the Manchester/Aviation Alternative, a 20.5-acre industrial use site located in the City of Inglewood; 3) Site 17 - the Marine/Redondo Beach Alternative, a 14.2-acre industrial use site located in the City of Redondo Beach; and 4) the Division 22 Northern Expansion Alternative, a 3.5-acre industrial use site located in the City of Hawthorne. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of an effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems affecting corridor residents and businesses by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. None of the maintenance site alternatives would result in the displacement of any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The Site 14, Site 15, Site 17, and Division 22 maintenance facility site alternatives would require acquisition of 12, 39, four, and four parcels, respectively. The displacement of businesses may result in the loss of five to 390 employees without the implementation of mitigation measures. There would be potential for indirect significant impacts to businesses that are airport-related or dependent if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Uniform Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0435D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110054, Supplemental Draft EIS--204 pages, Appendices--558 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 16 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Noise KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133182?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+SEPTEMBER+2009%29.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+SEPTEMBER+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 2009). [Part 15 of 16] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 2009). AN - 873133153; 14810-4_0015 AB - PURPOSE: Transit service improvements in the heavily-traveled Crenshaw Transit Corridor in Los Angeles County, California are proposed. The study area encompasses 33 square miles and portions of five jurisdictions: the cities of Los Angeles, Inglewood, Hawthorne, and El Segundo, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Three major interstate highways traverse the area including the Santa Monica Freeway and Glenn Anderson Freeway running east-west, and the San Diego Freeway which runs north-south. The Harbor Freeway parallels the corridor, running north-south immediately east of the area. A September 2009 draft EIS analyzed a No Build Alternative, a low-cost transportation system management (TSM) alternative, a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Alternative, and a Light Rail Transit (LRT) Alternative. In December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted LRT as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Station to the Exposition LRT line (under construction) at the Exposition/Crenshaw Boulevards intersection. The LRT alignment would be doubletracked and would be comprised of at-grade street, at-grade railroad, aerial, and below-grade sections. This supplemental draft EIS presents additional information pertaining to the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor Project, previously known as the Crenshaw Transit Corridor Project. Specifically, four new alternative maintenance facility sites are analyzed and historic resources and parklands are evaluated for the area of potential effects. The four new alternative maintenance facility sites include: 1) Site 14 - the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative, a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the City of Los Angeles; 2) Site 15 - the Manchester/Aviation Alternative, a 20.5-acre industrial use site located in the City of Inglewood; 3) Site 17 - the Marine/Redondo Beach Alternative, a 14.2-acre industrial use site located in the City of Redondo Beach; and 4) the Division 22 Northern Expansion Alternative, a 3.5-acre industrial use site located in the City of Hawthorne. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of an effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems affecting corridor residents and businesses by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. None of the maintenance site alternatives would result in the displacement of any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The Site 14, Site 15, Site 17, and Division 22 maintenance facility site alternatives would require acquisition of 12, 39, four, and four parcels, respectively. The displacement of businesses may result in the loss of five to 390 employees without the implementation of mitigation measures. There would be potential for indirect significant impacts to businesses that are airport-related or dependent if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Uniform Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0435D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110054, Supplemental Draft EIS--204 pages, Appendices--558 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Noise KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133153?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+SEPTEMBER+2009%29.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+SEPTEMBER+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 2009). [Part 14 of 16] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 2009). AN - 873132624; 14810-4_0014 AB - PURPOSE: Transit service improvements in the heavily-traveled Crenshaw Transit Corridor in Los Angeles County, California are proposed. The study area encompasses 33 square miles and portions of five jurisdictions: the cities of Los Angeles, Inglewood, Hawthorne, and El Segundo, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Three major interstate highways traverse the area including the Santa Monica Freeway and Glenn Anderson Freeway running east-west, and the San Diego Freeway which runs north-south. The Harbor Freeway parallels the corridor, running north-south immediately east of the area. A September 2009 draft EIS analyzed a No Build Alternative, a low-cost transportation system management (TSM) alternative, a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Alternative, and a Light Rail Transit (LRT) Alternative. In December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted LRT as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Station to the Exposition LRT line (under construction) at the Exposition/Crenshaw Boulevards intersection. The LRT alignment would be doubletracked and would be comprised of at-grade street, at-grade railroad, aerial, and below-grade sections. This supplemental draft EIS presents additional information pertaining to the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor Project, previously known as the Crenshaw Transit Corridor Project. Specifically, four new alternative maintenance facility sites are analyzed and historic resources and parklands are evaluated for the area of potential effects. The four new alternative maintenance facility sites include: 1) Site 14 - the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative, a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the City of Los Angeles; 2) Site 15 - the Manchester/Aviation Alternative, a 20.5-acre industrial use site located in the City of Inglewood; 3) Site 17 - the Marine/Redondo Beach Alternative, a 14.2-acre industrial use site located in the City of Redondo Beach; and 4) the Division 22 Northern Expansion Alternative, a 3.5-acre industrial use site located in the City of Hawthorne. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of an effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems affecting corridor residents and businesses by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. None of the maintenance site alternatives would result in the displacement of any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The Site 14, Site 15, Site 17, and Division 22 maintenance facility site alternatives would require acquisition of 12, 39, four, and four parcels, respectively. The displacement of businesses may result in the loss of five to 390 employees without the implementation of mitigation measures. There would be potential for indirect significant impacts to businesses that are airport-related or dependent if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Uniform Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0435D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110054, Supplemental Draft EIS--204 pages, Appendices--558 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Noise KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132624?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+SEPTEMBER+2009%29.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+SEPTEMBER+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 7 of 26] T2 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132596; 14807-1_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The establishment of a large-scale training range facility at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center (the Combat Center) at Twentynine Palms, California that would accommodate sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training for all elements of a Marine Expeditionary Brigade (MEB) is proposed. The Marine Corps would acquire additional land adjacent to the 600,000-acre Combat Center, establish and modify military special use airspace (SUA) above the proposed MEB-sized training range, and conduct the specified MEB training. The Combat Center is the place through which nearly all Marine Corps units rotate for training before deployment. While it has been the site of large-scale, combined-arms live-fire training in the past, it has insufficient land and airspace to meet MEB requirements. The Combat Center is located in the Mojave Desert in San Bernardino County 150 miles east of Los Angeles and 50 miles northeast of Palm Springs. The southern boundary of the installation is adjacent to the City of Twentynine Palms, six miles north of State Route 62. The northern boundary of the installation is located south of Interstate 40. The western boundary of the installation is adjacent to the Johnson Valley off-highway vehicle (OHV) area, which is administered by the Bureau of Land Management. The eastern boundary of the installation is located west of Amboy Road. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this draft EIS. Alternative 1 would involve exclusive year-around military use of the entire west study area; alternatives 2 and 6 would involve exclusive year-around military use of a portion of the west study area; and alternatives 4, 5, and 6 would permit some level of restricted public use in all or part of the west study area for 10 months of each year. All the action alternatives except Alternative 5 would also involve acquisition of the south study area for exclusive military use. Alternative 3 would involve acquisition of the east study area for exclusive year-around military use except for public use of Amboy Road. All six alternatives involve the establishment of new SUA and the modification of existing airspace. Only the Sundance Military Operations Area (MOA) would be subject to modification of existing lateral dimensions, which is proposed under all six alternatives. All other proposed modifications to existing SUA under any of the alternatives would involve changes in vertical dimensions and times of use only. Alternative 3 would also involve reclassifying two areas. Under all alternatives, acquired airspace would be returned to Federal Aviation Administration control to be made available for commercial and general aviation when not being used by the Marine Corps. Two MEB exercises involving sustained combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training would be conducted each year under all six of the action alternatives with one MEB exercise involving 10,000 to 15,000 Marines likely to occur every six months. For alternatives that involve year-around exclusive military control of all or part of the west or east study areas (Alternatives 1, 2, 3, and 6), MEB building block training (including smaller-scale live fire and maneuver operations by units up to a single battalion in size) would occur in these acquired exclusive military use areas during times of the year that MEB exercises are not being conducted. Alternative 6, which is the preferred alternative, would require the acquisition of 146,667 acres in the west study area and 21,304 acres in the south study area. The land acquired within the west study area in Johnson Valley would be divided into a 38,137-acre area that would be open for restricted public access and use during periods when the MEB exercise is not occurring, and a 108,530-acre area for exclusive military use. The communications infrastructure that supports current Combat Center range operations would be extended into any acquired land via the proposed installation of two or three communications towers. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The acquisition of land contiguous to existing Combat Center operating areas would provide a sufficient area for realistic MEB-sized, sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training that meets at least the minimum threshold level training requirements within appropriate margins of safety. The modification and establishment of SUA would enable full integration of MEB-sized aviation combat operations and both air- and ground-delivered live-fire ordnance use within appropriate margins of safety. Implementation of the preferred alternative would preserve some public access to acquired lands in Johnson Valley. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in significant, unmitigable impacts to: land use, as a result of incompatibility with the Johnson Valley OHV Area Management Plan; recreation, as a result of loss of access to and the use of 57 percent of the Johnson Valley OHV Area; airspace management, as a result of the adverse effects of the proposed new and modified SUA; and air quality, as a result of nitrogen oxide emissions. Training activities would also have potential adverse effects on desert tortoises including total potential take of between 154 and 714 federally threatened desert tortoises over the life of the project. JF - EPA number: 110051, Draft EIS--941 pages, Appendices-625 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 7 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Desert Land KW - Emissions KW - Helicopters KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Munitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Threatened Species (Animals) KW - Vegetation KW - Weapon Systems KW - Wildlife KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Mojave Desert UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132596?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Marine Corps Air Ground Task Force Training Command, Twentynine Palms, California; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 6 of 26] T2 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132582; 14807-1_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The establishment of a large-scale training range facility at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center (the Combat Center) at Twentynine Palms, California that would accommodate sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training for all elements of a Marine Expeditionary Brigade (MEB) is proposed. The Marine Corps would acquire additional land adjacent to the 600,000-acre Combat Center, establish and modify military special use airspace (SUA) above the proposed MEB-sized training range, and conduct the specified MEB training. The Combat Center is the place through which nearly all Marine Corps units rotate for training before deployment. While it has been the site of large-scale, combined-arms live-fire training in the past, it has insufficient land and airspace to meet MEB requirements. The Combat Center is located in the Mojave Desert in San Bernardino County 150 miles east of Los Angeles and 50 miles northeast of Palm Springs. The southern boundary of the installation is adjacent to the City of Twentynine Palms, six miles north of State Route 62. The northern boundary of the installation is located south of Interstate 40. The western boundary of the installation is adjacent to the Johnson Valley off-highway vehicle (OHV) area, which is administered by the Bureau of Land Management. The eastern boundary of the installation is located west of Amboy Road. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this draft EIS. Alternative 1 would involve exclusive year-around military use of the entire west study area; alternatives 2 and 6 would involve exclusive year-around military use of a portion of the west study area; and alternatives 4, 5, and 6 would permit some level of restricted public use in all or part of the west study area for 10 months of each year. All the action alternatives except Alternative 5 would also involve acquisition of the south study area for exclusive military use. Alternative 3 would involve acquisition of the east study area for exclusive year-around military use except for public use of Amboy Road. All six alternatives involve the establishment of new SUA and the modification of existing airspace. Only the Sundance Military Operations Area (MOA) would be subject to modification of existing lateral dimensions, which is proposed under all six alternatives. All other proposed modifications to existing SUA under any of the alternatives would involve changes in vertical dimensions and times of use only. Alternative 3 would also involve reclassifying two areas. Under all alternatives, acquired airspace would be returned to Federal Aviation Administration control to be made available for commercial and general aviation when not being used by the Marine Corps. Two MEB exercises involving sustained combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training would be conducted each year under all six of the action alternatives with one MEB exercise involving 10,000 to 15,000 Marines likely to occur every six months. For alternatives that involve year-around exclusive military control of all or part of the west or east study areas (Alternatives 1, 2, 3, and 6), MEB building block training (including smaller-scale live fire and maneuver operations by units up to a single battalion in size) would occur in these acquired exclusive military use areas during times of the year that MEB exercises are not being conducted. Alternative 6, which is the preferred alternative, would require the acquisition of 146,667 acres in the west study area and 21,304 acres in the south study area. The land acquired within the west study area in Johnson Valley would be divided into a 38,137-acre area that would be open for restricted public access and use during periods when the MEB exercise is not occurring, and a 108,530-acre area for exclusive military use. The communications infrastructure that supports current Combat Center range operations would be extended into any acquired land via the proposed installation of two or three communications towers. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The acquisition of land contiguous to existing Combat Center operating areas would provide a sufficient area for realistic MEB-sized, sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training that meets at least the minimum threshold level training requirements within appropriate margins of safety. The modification and establishment of SUA would enable full integration of MEB-sized aviation combat operations and both air- and ground-delivered live-fire ordnance use within appropriate margins of safety. Implementation of the preferred alternative would preserve some public access to acquired lands in Johnson Valley. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in significant, unmitigable impacts to: land use, as a result of incompatibility with the Johnson Valley OHV Area Management Plan; recreation, as a result of loss of access to and the use of 57 percent of the Johnson Valley OHV Area; airspace management, as a result of the adverse effects of the proposed new and modified SUA; and air quality, as a result of nitrogen oxide emissions. Training activities would also have potential adverse effects on desert tortoises including total potential take of between 154 and 714 federally threatened desert tortoises over the life of the project. JF - EPA number: 110051, Draft EIS--941 pages, Appendices-625 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 6 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Desert Land KW - Emissions KW - Helicopters KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Munitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Threatened Species (Animals) KW - Vegetation KW - Weapon Systems KW - Wildlife KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Mojave Desert UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132582?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Marine Corps Air Ground Task Force Training Command, Twentynine Palms, California; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 5 of 26] T2 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132572; 14807-1_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The establishment of a large-scale training range facility at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center (the Combat Center) at Twentynine Palms, California that would accommodate sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training for all elements of a Marine Expeditionary Brigade (MEB) is proposed. The Marine Corps would acquire additional land adjacent to the 600,000-acre Combat Center, establish and modify military special use airspace (SUA) above the proposed MEB-sized training range, and conduct the specified MEB training. The Combat Center is the place through which nearly all Marine Corps units rotate for training before deployment. While it has been the site of large-scale, combined-arms live-fire training in the past, it has insufficient land and airspace to meet MEB requirements. The Combat Center is located in the Mojave Desert in San Bernardino County 150 miles east of Los Angeles and 50 miles northeast of Palm Springs. The southern boundary of the installation is adjacent to the City of Twentynine Palms, six miles north of State Route 62. The northern boundary of the installation is located south of Interstate 40. The western boundary of the installation is adjacent to the Johnson Valley off-highway vehicle (OHV) area, which is administered by the Bureau of Land Management. The eastern boundary of the installation is located west of Amboy Road. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this draft EIS. Alternative 1 would involve exclusive year-around military use of the entire west study area; alternatives 2 and 6 would involve exclusive year-around military use of a portion of the west study area; and alternatives 4, 5, and 6 would permit some level of restricted public use in all or part of the west study area for 10 months of each year. All the action alternatives except Alternative 5 would also involve acquisition of the south study area for exclusive military use. Alternative 3 would involve acquisition of the east study area for exclusive year-around military use except for public use of Amboy Road. All six alternatives involve the establishment of new SUA and the modification of existing airspace. Only the Sundance Military Operations Area (MOA) would be subject to modification of existing lateral dimensions, which is proposed under all six alternatives. All other proposed modifications to existing SUA under any of the alternatives would involve changes in vertical dimensions and times of use only. Alternative 3 would also involve reclassifying two areas. Under all alternatives, acquired airspace would be returned to Federal Aviation Administration control to be made available for commercial and general aviation when not being used by the Marine Corps. Two MEB exercises involving sustained combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training would be conducted each year under all six of the action alternatives with one MEB exercise involving 10,000 to 15,000 Marines likely to occur every six months. For alternatives that involve year-around exclusive military control of all or part of the west or east study areas (Alternatives 1, 2, 3, and 6), MEB building block training (including smaller-scale live fire and maneuver operations by units up to a single battalion in size) would occur in these acquired exclusive military use areas during times of the year that MEB exercises are not being conducted. Alternative 6, which is the preferred alternative, would require the acquisition of 146,667 acres in the west study area and 21,304 acres in the south study area. The land acquired within the west study area in Johnson Valley would be divided into a 38,137-acre area that would be open for restricted public access and use during periods when the MEB exercise is not occurring, and a 108,530-acre area for exclusive military use. The communications infrastructure that supports current Combat Center range operations would be extended into any acquired land via the proposed installation of two or three communications towers. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The acquisition of land contiguous to existing Combat Center operating areas would provide a sufficient area for realistic MEB-sized, sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training that meets at least the minimum threshold level training requirements within appropriate margins of safety. The modification and establishment of SUA would enable full integration of MEB-sized aviation combat operations and both air- and ground-delivered live-fire ordnance use within appropriate margins of safety. Implementation of the preferred alternative would preserve some public access to acquired lands in Johnson Valley. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in significant, unmitigable impacts to: land use, as a result of incompatibility with the Johnson Valley OHV Area Management Plan; recreation, as a result of loss of access to and the use of 57 percent of the Johnson Valley OHV Area; airspace management, as a result of the adverse effects of the proposed new and modified SUA; and air quality, as a result of nitrogen oxide emissions. Training activities would also have potential adverse effects on desert tortoises including total potential take of between 154 and 714 federally threatened desert tortoises over the life of the project. JF - EPA number: 110051, Draft EIS--941 pages, Appendices-625 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 5 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Desert Land KW - Emissions KW - Helicopters KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Munitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Threatened Species (Animals) KW - Vegetation KW - Weapon Systems KW - Wildlife KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Mojave Desert UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132572?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Marine Corps Air Ground Task Force Training Command, Twentynine Palms, California; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 3 of 26] T2 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131955; 14807-1_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The establishment of a large-scale training range facility at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center (the Combat Center) at Twentynine Palms, California that would accommodate sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training for all elements of a Marine Expeditionary Brigade (MEB) is proposed. The Marine Corps would acquire additional land adjacent to the 600,000-acre Combat Center, establish and modify military special use airspace (SUA) above the proposed MEB-sized training range, and conduct the specified MEB training. The Combat Center is the place through which nearly all Marine Corps units rotate for training before deployment. While it has been the site of large-scale, combined-arms live-fire training in the past, it has insufficient land and airspace to meet MEB requirements. The Combat Center is located in the Mojave Desert in San Bernardino County 150 miles east of Los Angeles and 50 miles northeast of Palm Springs. The southern boundary of the installation is adjacent to the City of Twentynine Palms, six miles north of State Route 62. The northern boundary of the installation is located south of Interstate 40. The western boundary of the installation is adjacent to the Johnson Valley off-highway vehicle (OHV) area, which is administered by the Bureau of Land Management. The eastern boundary of the installation is located west of Amboy Road. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this draft EIS. Alternative 1 would involve exclusive year-around military use of the entire west study area; alternatives 2 and 6 would involve exclusive year-around military use of a portion of the west study area; and alternatives 4, 5, and 6 would permit some level of restricted public use in all or part of the west study area for 10 months of each year. All the action alternatives except Alternative 5 would also involve acquisition of the south study area for exclusive military use. Alternative 3 would involve acquisition of the east study area for exclusive year-around military use except for public use of Amboy Road. All six alternatives involve the establishment of new SUA and the modification of existing airspace. Only the Sundance Military Operations Area (MOA) would be subject to modification of existing lateral dimensions, which is proposed under all six alternatives. All other proposed modifications to existing SUA under any of the alternatives would involve changes in vertical dimensions and times of use only. Alternative 3 would also involve reclassifying two areas. Under all alternatives, acquired airspace would be returned to Federal Aviation Administration control to be made available for commercial and general aviation when not being used by the Marine Corps. Two MEB exercises involving sustained combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training would be conducted each year under all six of the action alternatives with one MEB exercise involving 10,000 to 15,000 Marines likely to occur every six months. For alternatives that involve year-around exclusive military control of all or part of the west or east study areas (Alternatives 1, 2, 3, and 6), MEB building block training (including smaller-scale live fire and maneuver operations by units up to a single battalion in size) would occur in these acquired exclusive military use areas during times of the year that MEB exercises are not being conducted. Alternative 6, which is the preferred alternative, would require the acquisition of 146,667 acres in the west study area and 21,304 acres in the south study area. The land acquired within the west study area in Johnson Valley would be divided into a 38,137-acre area that would be open for restricted public access and use during periods when the MEB exercise is not occurring, and a 108,530-acre area for exclusive military use. The communications infrastructure that supports current Combat Center range operations would be extended into any acquired land via the proposed installation of two or three communications towers. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The acquisition of land contiguous to existing Combat Center operating areas would provide a sufficient area for realistic MEB-sized, sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training that meets at least the minimum threshold level training requirements within appropriate margins of safety. The modification and establishment of SUA would enable full integration of MEB-sized aviation combat operations and both air- and ground-delivered live-fire ordnance use within appropriate margins of safety. Implementation of the preferred alternative would preserve some public access to acquired lands in Johnson Valley. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in significant, unmitigable impacts to: land use, as a result of incompatibility with the Johnson Valley OHV Area Management Plan; recreation, as a result of loss of access to and the use of 57 percent of the Johnson Valley OHV Area; airspace management, as a result of the adverse effects of the proposed new and modified SUA; and air quality, as a result of nitrogen oxide emissions. Training activities would also have potential adverse effects on desert tortoises including total potential take of between 154 and 714 federally threatened desert tortoises over the life of the project. JF - EPA number: 110051, Draft EIS--941 pages, Appendices-625 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 3 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Desert Land KW - Emissions KW - Helicopters KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Munitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Threatened Species (Animals) KW - Vegetation KW - Weapon Systems KW - Wildlife KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Mojave Desert UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131955?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Marine Corps Air Ground Task Force Training Command, Twentynine Palms, California; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 2 of 26] T2 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131951; 14807-1_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The establishment of a large-scale training range facility at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center (the Combat Center) at Twentynine Palms, California that would accommodate sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training for all elements of a Marine Expeditionary Brigade (MEB) is proposed. The Marine Corps would acquire additional land adjacent to the 600,000-acre Combat Center, establish and modify military special use airspace (SUA) above the proposed MEB-sized training range, and conduct the specified MEB training. The Combat Center is the place through which nearly all Marine Corps units rotate for training before deployment. While it has been the site of large-scale, combined-arms live-fire training in the past, it has insufficient land and airspace to meet MEB requirements. The Combat Center is located in the Mojave Desert in San Bernardino County 150 miles east of Los Angeles and 50 miles northeast of Palm Springs. The southern boundary of the installation is adjacent to the City of Twentynine Palms, six miles north of State Route 62. The northern boundary of the installation is located south of Interstate 40. The western boundary of the installation is adjacent to the Johnson Valley off-highway vehicle (OHV) area, which is administered by the Bureau of Land Management. The eastern boundary of the installation is located west of Amboy Road. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this draft EIS. Alternative 1 would involve exclusive year-around military use of the entire west study area; alternatives 2 and 6 would involve exclusive year-around military use of a portion of the west study area; and alternatives 4, 5, and 6 would permit some level of restricted public use in all or part of the west study area for 10 months of each year. All the action alternatives except Alternative 5 would also involve acquisition of the south study area for exclusive military use. Alternative 3 would involve acquisition of the east study area for exclusive year-around military use except for public use of Amboy Road. All six alternatives involve the establishment of new SUA and the modification of existing airspace. Only the Sundance Military Operations Area (MOA) would be subject to modification of existing lateral dimensions, which is proposed under all six alternatives. All other proposed modifications to existing SUA under any of the alternatives would involve changes in vertical dimensions and times of use only. Alternative 3 would also involve reclassifying two areas. Under all alternatives, acquired airspace would be returned to Federal Aviation Administration control to be made available for commercial and general aviation when not being used by the Marine Corps. Two MEB exercises involving sustained combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training would be conducted each year under all six of the action alternatives with one MEB exercise involving 10,000 to 15,000 Marines likely to occur every six months. For alternatives that involve year-around exclusive military control of all or part of the west or east study areas (Alternatives 1, 2, 3, and 6), MEB building block training (including smaller-scale live fire and maneuver operations by units up to a single battalion in size) would occur in these acquired exclusive military use areas during times of the year that MEB exercises are not being conducted. Alternative 6, which is the preferred alternative, would require the acquisition of 146,667 acres in the west study area and 21,304 acres in the south study area. The land acquired within the west study area in Johnson Valley would be divided into a 38,137-acre area that would be open for restricted public access and use during periods when the MEB exercise is not occurring, and a 108,530-acre area for exclusive military use. The communications infrastructure that supports current Combat Center range operations would be extended into any acquired land via the proposed installation of two or three communications towers. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The acquisition of land contiguous to existing Combat Center operating areas would provide a sufficient area for realistic MEB-sized, sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training that meets at least the minimum threshold level training requirements within appropriate margins of safety. The modification and establishment of SUA would enable full integration of MEB-sized aviation combat operations and both air- and ground-delivered live-fire ordnance use within appropriate margins of safety. Implementation of the preferred alternative would preserve some public access to acquired lands in Johnson Valley. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in significant, unmitigable impacts to: land use, as a result of incompatibility with the Johnson Valley OHV Area Management Plan; recreation, as a result of loss of access to and the use of 57 percent of the Johnson Valley OHV Area; airspace management, as a result of the adverse effects of the proposed new and modified SUA; and air quality, as a result of nitrogen oxide emissions. Training activities would also have potential adverse effects on desert tortoises including total potential take of between 154 and 714 federally threatened desert tortoises over the life of the project. JF - EPA number: 110051, Draft EIS--941 pages, Appendices-625 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Desert Land KW - Emissions KW - Helicopters KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Munitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Threatened Species (Animals) KW - Vegetation KW - Weapon Systems KW - Wildlife KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Mojave Desert UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131951?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Marine Corps Air Ground Task Force Training Command, Twentynine Palms, California; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 1 of 26] T2 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131947; 14807-1_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The establishment of a large-scale training range facility at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center (the Combat Center) at Twentynine Palms, California that would accommodate sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training for all elements of a Marine Expeditionary Brigade (MEB) is proposed. The Marine Corps would acquire additional land adjacent to the 600,000-acre Combat Center, establish and modify military special use airspace (SUA) above the proposed MEB-sized training range, and conduct the specified MEB training. The Combat Center is the place through which nearly all Marine Corps units rotate for training before deployment. While it has been the site of large-scale, combined-arms live-fire training in the past, it has insufficient land and airspace to meet MEB requirements. The Combat Center is located in the Mojave Desert in San Bernardino County 150 miles east of Los Angeles and 50 miles northeast of Palm Springs. The southern boundary of the installation is adjacent to the City of Twentynine Palms, six miles north of State Route 62. The northern boundary of the installation is located south of Interstate 40. The western boundary of the installation is adjacent to the Johnson Valley off-highway vehicle (OHV) area, which is administered by the Bureau of Land Management. The eastern boundary of the installation is located west of Amboy Road. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this draft EIS. Alternative 1 would involve exclusive year-around military use of the entire west study area; alternatives 2 and 6 would involve exclusive year-around military use of a portion of the west study area; and alternatives 4, 5, and 6 would permit some level of restricted public use in all or part of the west study area for 10 months of each year. All the action alternatives except Alternative 5 would also involve acquisition of the south study area for exclusive military use. Alternative 3 would involve acquisition of the east study area for exclusive year-around military use except for public use of Amboy Road. All six alternatives involve the establishment of new SUA and the modification of existing airspace. Only the Sundance Military Operations Area (MOA) would be subject to modification of existing lateral dimensions, which is proposed under all six alternatives. All other proposed modifications to existing SUA under any of the alternatives would involve changes in vertical dimensions and times of use only. Alternative 3 would also involve reclassifying two areas. Under all alternatives, acquired airspace would be returned to Federal Aviation Administration control to be made available for commercial and general aviation when not being used by the Marine Corps. Two MEB exercises involving sustained combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training would be conducted each year under all six of the action alternatives with one MEB exercise involving 10,000 to 15,000 Marines likely to occur every six months. For alternatives that involve year-around exclusive military control of all or part of the west or east study areas (Alternatives 1, 2, 3, and 6), MEB building block training (including smaller-scale live fire and maneuver operations by units up to a single battalion in size) would occur in these acquired exclusive military use areas during times of the year that MEB exercises are not being conducted. Alternative 6, which is the preferred alternative, would require the acquisition of 146,667 acres in the west study area and 21,304 acres in the south study area. The land acquired within the west study area in Johnson Valley would be divided into a 38,137-acre area that would be open for restricted public access and use during periods when the MEB exercise is not occurring, and a 108,530-acre area for exclusive military use. The communications infrastructure that supports current Combat Center range operations would be extended into any acquired land via the proposed installation of two or three communications towers. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The acquisition of land contiguous to existing Combat Center operating areas would provide a sufficient area for realistic MEB-sized, sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training that meets at least the minimum threshold level training requirements within appropriate margins of safety. The modification and establishment of SUA would enable full integration of MEB-sized aviation combat operations and both air- and ground-delivered live-fire ordnance use within appropriate margins of safety. Implementation of the preferred alternative would preserve some public access to acquired lands in Johnson Valley. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in significant, unmitigable impacts to: land use, as a result of incompatibility with the Johnson Valley OHV Area Management Plan; recreation, as a result of loss of access to and the use of 57 percent of the Johnson Valley OHV Area; airspace management, as a result of the adverse effects of the proposed new and modified SUA; and air quality, as a result of nitrogen oxide emissions. Training activities would also have potential adverse effects on desert tortoises including total potential take of between 154 and 714 federally threatened desert tortoises over the life of the project. JF - EPA number: 110051, Draft EIS--941 pages, Appendices-625 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Desert Land KW - Emissions KW - Helicopters KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Munitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Threatened Species (Animals) KW - Vegetation KW - Weapon Systems KW - Wildlife KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Mojave Desert UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131947?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Marine Corps Air Ground Task Force Training Command, Twentynine Palms, California; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 2009). [Part 13 of 16] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 2009). AN - 873131639; 14810-4_0013 AB - PURPOSE: Transit service improvements in the heavily-traveled Crenshaw Transit Corridor in Los Angeles County, California are proposed. The study area encompasses 33 square miles and portions of five jurisdictions: the cities of Los Angeles, Inglewood, Hawthorne, and El Segundo, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Three major interstate highways traverse the area including the Santa Monica Freeway and Glenn Anderson Freeway running east-west, and the San Diego Freeway which runs north-south. The Harbor Freeway parallels the corridor, running north-south immediately east of the area. A September 2009 draft EIS analyzed a No Build Alternative, a low-cost transportation system management (TSM) alternative, a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Alternative, and a Light Rail Transit (LRT) Alternative. In December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted LRT as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Station to the Exposition LRT line (under construction) at the Exposition/Crenshaw Boulevards intersection. The LRT alignment would be doubletracked and would be comprised of at-grade street, at-grade railroad, aerial, and below-grade sections. This supplemental draft EIS presents additional information pertaining to the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor Project, previously known as the Crenshaw Transit Corridor Project. Specifically, four new alternative maintenance facility sites are analyzed and historic resources and parklands are evaluated for the area of potential effects. The four new alternative maintenance facility sites include: 1) Site 14 - the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative, a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the City of Los Angeles; 2) Site 15 - the Manchester/Aviation Alternative, a 20.5-acre industrial use site located in the City of Inglewood; 3) Site 17 - the Marine/Redondo Beach Alternative, a 14.2-acre industrial use site located in the City of Redondo Beach; and 4) the Division 22 Northern Expansion Alternative, a 3.5-acre industrial use site located in the City of Hawthorne. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of an effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems affecting corridor residents and businesses by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. None of the maintenance site alternatives would result in the displacement of any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The Site 14, Site 15, Site 17, and Division 22 maintenance facility site alternatives would require acquisition of 12, 39, four, and four parcels, respectively. The displacement of businesses may result in the loss of five to 390 employees without the implementation of mitigation measures. There would be potential for indirect significant impacts to businesses that are airport-related or dependent if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Uniform Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0435D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110054, Supplemental Draft EIS--204 pages, Appendices--558 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 13 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Noise KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131639?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+SEPTEMBER+2009%29.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+SEPTEMBER+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 2009). [Part 12 of 16] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 2009). AN - 873131632; 14810-4_0012 AB - PURPOSE: Transit service improvements in the heavily-traveled Crenshaw Transit Corridor in Los Angeles County, California are proposed. The study area encompasses 33 square miles and portions of five jurisdictions: the cities of Los Angeles, Inglewood, Hawthorne, and El Segundo, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Three major interstate highways traverse the area including the Santa Monica Freeway and Glenn Anderson Freeway running east-west, and the San Diego Freeway which runs north-south. The Harbor Freeway parallels the corridor, running north-south immediately east of the area. A September 2009 draft EIS analyzed a No Build Alternative, a low-cost transportation system management (TSM) alternative, a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Alternative, and a Light Rail Transit (LRT) Alternative. In December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted LRT as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Station to the Exposition LRT line (under construction) at the Exposition/Crenshaw Boulevards intersection. The LRT alignment would be doubletracked and would be comprised of at-grade street, at-grade railroad, aerial, and below-grade sections. This supplemental draft EIS presents additional information pertaining to the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor Project, previously known as the Crenshaw Transit Corridor Project. Specifically, four new alternative maintenance facility sites are analyzed and historic resources and parklands are evaluated for the area of potential effects. The four new alternative maintenance facility sites include: 1) Site 14 - the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative, a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the City of Los Angeles; 2) Site 15 - the Manchester/Aviation Alternative, a 20.5-acre industrial use site located in the City of Inglewood; 3) Site 17 - the Marine/Redondo Beach Alternative, a 14.2-acre industrial use site located in the City of Redondo Beach; and 4) the Division 22 Northern Expansion Alternative, a 3.5-acre industrial use site located in the City of Hawthorne. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of an effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems affecting corridor residents and businesses by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. None of the maintenance site alternatives would result in the displacement of any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The Site 14, Site 15, Site 17, and Division 22 maintenance facility site alternatives would require acquisition of 12, 39, four, and four parcels, respectively. The displacement of businesses may result in the loss of five to 390 employees without the implementation of mitigation measures. There would be potential for indirect significant impacts to businesses that are airport-related or dependent if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Uniform Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0435D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110054, Supplemental Draft EIS--204 pages, Appendices--558 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Noise KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131632?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+SEPTEMBER+2009%29.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+SEPTEMBER+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 2009). [Part 11 of 16] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 2009). AN - 873131624; 14810-4_0011 AB - PURPOSE: Transit service improvements in the heavily-traveled Crenshaw Transit Corridor in Los Angeles County, California are proposed. The study area encompasses 33 square miles and portions of five jurisdictions: the cities of Los Angeles, Inglewood, Hawthorne, and El Segundo, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Three major interstate highways traverse the area including the Santa Monica Freeway and Glenn Anderson Freeway running east-west, and the San Diego Freeway which runs north-south. The Harbor Freeway parallels the corridor, running north-south immediately east of the area. A September 2009 draft EIS analyzed a No Build Alternative, a low-cost transportation system management (TSM) alternative, a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Alternative, and a Light Rail Transit (LRT) Alternative. In December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted LRT as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Station to the Exposition LRT line (under construction) at the Exposition/Crenshaw Boulevards intersection. The LRT alignment would be doubletracked and would be comprised of at-grade street, at-grade railroad, aerial, and below-grade sections. This supplemental draft EIS presents additional information pertaining to the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor Project, previously known as the Crenshaw Transit Corridor Project. Specifically, four new alternative maintenance facility sites are analyzed and historic resources and parklands are evaluated for the area of potential effects. The four new alternative maintenance facility sites include: 1) Site 14 - the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative, a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the City of Los Angeles; 2) Site 15 - the Manchester/Aviation Alternative, a 20.5-acre industrial use site located in the City of Inglewood; 3) Site 17 - the Marine/Redondo Beach Alternative, a 14.2-acre industrial use site located in the City of Redondo Beach; and 4) the Division 22 Northern Expansion Alternative, a 3.5-acre industrial use site located in the City of Hawthorne. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of an effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems affecting corridor residents and businesses by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. None of the maintenance site alternatives would result in the displacement of any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The Site 14, Site 15, Site 17, and Division 22 maintenance facility site alternatives would require acquisition of 12, 39, four, and four parcels, respectively. The displacement of businesses may result in the loss of five to 390 employees without the implementation of mitigation measures. There would be potential for indirect significant impacts to businesses that are airport-related or dependent if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Uniform Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0435D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110054, Supplemental Draft EIS--204 pages, Appendices--558 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Noise KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131624?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+SEPTEMBER+2009%29.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+SEPTEMBER+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 2009). [Part 10 of 16] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 2009). AN - 873131620; 14810-4_0010 AB - PURPOSE: Transit service improvements in the heavily-traveled Crenshaw Transit Corridor in Los Angeles County, California are proposed. The study area encompasses 33 square miles and portions of five jurisdictions: the cities of Los Angeles, Inglewood, Hawthorne, and El Segundo, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Three major interstate highways traverse the area including the Santa Monica Freeway and Glenn Anderson Freeway running east-west, and the San Diego Freeway which runs north-south. The Harbor Freeway parallels the corridor, running north-south immediately east of the area. A September 2009 draft EIS analyzed a No Build Alternative, a low-cost transportation system management (TSM) alternative, a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Alternative, and a Light Rail Transit (LRT) Alternative. In December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted LRT as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Station to the Exposition LRT line (under construction) at the Exposition/Crenshaw Boulevards intersection. The LRT alignment would be doubletracked and would be comprised of at-grade street, at-grade railroad, aerial, and below-grade sections. This supplemental draft EIS presents additional information pertaining to the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor Project, previously known as the Crenshaw Transit Corridor Project. Specifically, four new alternative maintenance facility sites are analyzed and historic resources and parklands are evaluated for the area of potential effects. The four new alternative maintenance facility sites include: 1) Site 14 - the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative, a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the City of Los Angeles; 2) Site 15 - the Manchester/Aviation Alternative, a 20.5-acre industrial use site located in the City of Inglewood; 3) Site 17 - the Marine/Redondo Beach Alternative, a 14.2-acre industrial use site located in the City of Redondo Beach; and 4) the Division 22 Northern Expansion Alternative, a 3.5-acre industrial use site located in the City of Hawthorne. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of an effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems affecting corridor residents and businesses by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. None of the maintenance site alternatives would result in the displacement of any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The Site 14, Site 15, Site 17, and Division 22 maintenance facility site alternatives would require acquisition of 12, 39, four, and four parcels, respectively. The displacement of businesses may result in the loss of five to 390 employees without the implementation of mitigation measures. There would be potential for indirect significant impacts to businesses that are airport-related or dependent if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Uniform Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0435D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110054, Supplemental Draft EIS--204 pages, Appendices--558 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Noise KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131620?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+SEPTEMBER+2009%29.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+SEPTEMBER+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 2009). [Part 9 of 16] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 2009). AN - 873131614; 14810-4_0009 AB - PURPOSE: Transit service improvements in the heavily-traveled Crenshaw Transit Corridor in Los Angeles County, California are proposed. The study area encompasses 33 square miles and portions of five jurisdictions: the cities of Los Angeles, Inglewood, Hawthorne, and El Segundo, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Three major interstate highways traverse the area including the Santa Monica Freeway and Glenn Anderson Freeway running east-west, and the San Diego Freeway which runs north-south. The Harbor Freeway parallels the corridor, running north-south immediately east of the area. A September 2009 draft EIS analyzed a No Build Alternative, a low-cost transportation system management (TSM) alternative, a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Alternative, and a Light Rail Transit (LRT) Alternative. In December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted LRT as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Station to the Exposition LRT line (under construction) at the Exposition/Crenshaw Boulevards intersection. The LRT alignment would be doubletracked and would be comprised of at-grade street, at-grade railroad, aerial, and below-grade sections. This supplemental draft EIS presents additional information pertaining to the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor Project, previously known as the Crenshaw Transit Corridor Project. Specifically, four new alternative maintenance facility sites are analyzed and historic resources and parklands are evaluated for the area of potential effects. The four new alternative maintenance facility sites include: 1) Site 14 - the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative, a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the City of Los Angeles; 2) Site 15 - the Manchester/Aviation Alternative, a 20.5-acre industrial use site located in the City of Inglewood; 3) Site 17 - the Marine/Redondo Beach Alternative, a 14.2-acre industrial use site located in the City of Redondo Beach; and 4) the Division 22 Northern Expansion Alternative, a 3.5-acre industrial use site located in the City of Hawthorne. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of an effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems affecting corridor residents and businesses by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. None of the maintenance site alternatives would result in the displacement of any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The Site 14, Site 15, Site 17, and Division 22 maintenance facility site alternatives would require acquisition of 12, 39, four, and four parcels, respectively. The displacement of businesses may result in the loss of five to 390 employees without the implementation of mitigation measures. There would be potential for indirect significant impacts to businesses that are airport-related or dependent if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Uniform Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0435D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110054, Supplemental Draft EIS--204 pages, Appendices--558 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Noise KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131614?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+SEPTEMBER+2009%29.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+SEPTEMBER+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 2009). [Part 8 of 16] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 2009). AN - 873131606; 14810-4_0008 AB - PURPOSE: Transit service improvements in the heavily-traveled Crenshaw Transit Corridor in Los Angeles County, California are proposed. The study area encompasses 33 square miles and portions of five jurisdictions: the cities of Los Angeles, Inglewood, Hawthorne, and El Segundo, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Three major interstate highways traverse the area including the Santa Monica Freeway and Glenn Anderson Freeway running east-west, and the San Diego Freeway which runs north-south. The Harbor Freeway parallels the corridor, running north-south immediately east of the area. A September 2009 draft EIS analyzed a No Build Alternative, a low-cost transportation system management (TSM) alternative, a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Alternative, and a Light Rail Transit (LRT) Alternative. In December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted LRT as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Station to the Exposition LRT line (under construction) at the Exposition/Crenshaw Boulevards intersection. The LRT alignment would be doubletracked and would be comprised of at-grade street, at-grade railroad, aerial, and below-grade sections. This supplemental draft EIS presents additional information pertaining to the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor Project, previously known as the Crenshaw Transit Corridor Project. Specifically, four new alternative maintenance facility sites are analyzed and historic resources and parklands are evaluated for the area of potential effects. The four new alternative maintenance facility sites include: 1) Site 14 - the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative, a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the City of Los Angeles; 2) Site 15 - the Manchester/Aviation Alternative, a 20.5-acre industrial use site located in the City of Inglewood; 3) Site 17 - the Marine/Redondo Beach Alternative, a 14.2-acre industrial use site located in the City of Redondo Beach; and 4) the Division 22 Northern Expansion Alternative, a 3.5-acre industrial use site located in the City of Hawthorne. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of an effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems affecting corridor residents and businesses by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. None of the maintenance site alternatives would result in the displacement of any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The Site 14, Site 15, Site 17, and Division 22 maintenance facility site alternatives would require acquisition of 12, 39, four, and four parcels, respectively. The displacement of businesses may result in the loss of five to 390 employees without the implementation of mitigation measures. There would be potential for indirect significant impacts to businesses that are airport-related or dependent if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Uniform Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0435D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110054, Supplemental Draft EIS--204 pages, Appendices--558 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Noise KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131606?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+SEPTEMBER+2009%29.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+SEPTEMBER+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 19 of 26] T2 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873130416; 14807-1_0019 AB - PURPOSE: The establishment of a large-scale training range facility at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center (the Combat Center) at Twentynine Palms, California that would accommodate sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training for all elements of a Marine Expeditionary Brigade (MEB) is proposed. The Marine Corps would acquire additional land adjacent to the 600,000-acre Combat Center, establish and modify military special use airspace (SUA) above the proposed MEB-sized training range, and conduct the specified MEB training. The Combat Center is the place through which nearly all Marine Corps units rotate for training before deployment. While it has been the site of large-scale, combined-arms live-fire training in the past, it has insufficient land and airspace to meet MEB requirements. The Combat Center is located in the Mojave Desert in San Bernardino County 150 miles east of Los Angeles and 50 miles northeast of Palm Springs. The southern boundary of the installation is adjacent to the City of Twentynine Palms, six miles north of State Route 62. The northern boundary of the installation is located south of Interstate 40. The western boundary of the installation is adjacent to the Johnson Valley off-highway vehicle (OHV) area, which is administered by the Bureau of Land Management. The eastern boundary of the installation is located west of Amboy Road. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this draft EIS. Alternative 1 would involve exclusive year-around military use of the entire west study area; alternatives 2 and 6 would involve exclusive year-around military use of a portion of the west study area; and alternatives 4, 5, and 6 would permit some level of restricted public use in all or part of the west study area for 10 months of each year. All the action alternatives except Alternative 5 would also involve acquisition of the south study area for exclusive military use. Alternative 3 would involve acquisition of the east study area for exclusive year-around military use except for public use of Amboy Road. All six alternatives involve the establishment of new SUA and the modification of existing airspace. Only the Sundance Military Operations Area (MOA) would be subject to modification of existing lateral dimensions, which is proposed under all six alternatives. All other proposed modifications to existing SUA under any of the alternatives would involve changes in vertical dimensions and times of use only. Alternative 3 would also involve reclassifying two areas. Under all alternatives, acquired airspace would be returned to Federal Aviation Administration control to be made available for commercial and general aviation when not being used by the Marine Corps. Two MEB exercises involving sustained combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training would be conducted each year under all six of the action alternatives with one MEB exercise involving 10,000 to 15,000 Marines likely to occur every six months. For alternatives that involve year-around exclusive military control of all or part of the west or east study areas (Alternatives 1, 2, 3, and 6), MEB building block training (including smaller-scale live fire and maneuver operations by units up to a single battalion in size) would occur in these acquired exclusive military use areas during times of the year that MEB exercises are not being conducted. Alternative 6, which is the preferred alternative, would require the acquisition of 146,667 acres in the west study area and 21,304 acres in the south study area. The land acquired within the west study area in Johnson Valley would be divided into a 38,137-acre area that would be open for restricted public access and use during periods when the MEB exercise is not occurring, and a 108,530-acre area for exclusive military use. The communications infrastructure that supports current Combat Center range operations would be extended into any acquired land via the proposed installation of two or three communications towers. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The acquisition of land contiguous to existing Combat Center operating areas would provide a sufficient area for realistic MEB-sized, sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training that meets at least the minimum threshold level training requirements within appropriate margins of safety. The modification and establishment of SUA would enable full integration of MEB-sized aviation combat operations and both air- and ground-delivered live-fire ordnance use within appropriate margins of safety. Implementation of the preferred alternative would preserve some public access to acquired lands in Johnson Valley. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in significant, unmitigable impacts to: land use, as a result of incompatibility with the Johnson Valley OHV Area Management Plan; recreation, as a result of loss of access to and the use of 57 percent of the Johnson Valley OHV Area; airspace management, as a result of the adverse effects of the proposed new and modified SUA; and air quality, as a result of nitrogen oxide emissions. Training activities would also have potential adverse effects on desert tortoises including total potential take of between 154 and 714 federally threatened desert tortoises over the life of the project. JF - EPA number: 110051, Draft EIS--941 pages, Appendices-625 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 19 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Desert Land KW - Emissions KW - Helicopters KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Munitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Threatened Species (Animals) KW - Vegetation KW - Weapon Systems KW - Wildlife KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Mojave Desert UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130416?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Marine Corps Air Ground Task Force Training Command, Twentynine Palms, California; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 18 of 26] T2 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873130408; 14807-1_0018 AB - PURPOSE: The establishment of a large-scale training range facility at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center (the Combat Center) at Twentynine Palms, California that would accommodate sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training for all elements of a Marine Expeditionary Brigade (MEB) is proposed. The Marine Corps would acquire additional land adjacent to the 600,000-acre Combat Center, establish and modify military special use airspace (SUA) above the proposed MEB-sized training range, and conduct the specified MEB training. The Combat Center is the place through which nearly all Marine Corps units rotate for training before deployment. While it has been the site of large-scale, combined-arms live-fire training in the past, it has insufficient land and airspace to meet MEB requirements. The Combat Center is located in the Mojave Desert in San Bernardino County 150 miles east of Los Angeles and 50 miles northeast of Palm Springs. The southern boundary of the installation is adjacent to the City of Twentynine Palms, six miles north of State Route 62. The northern boundary of the installation is located south of Interstate 40. The western boundary of the installation is adjacent to the Johnson Valley off-highway vehicle (OHV) area, which is administered by the Bureau of Land Management. The eastern boundary of the installation is located west of Amboy Road. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this draft EIS. Alternative 1 would involve exclusive year-around military use of the entire west study area; alternatives 2 and 6 would involve exclusive year-around military use of a portion of the west study area; and alternatives 4, 5, and 6 would permit some level of restricted public use in all or part of the west study area for 10 months of each year. All the action alternatives except Alternative 5 would also involve acquisition of the south study area for exclusive military use. Alternative 3 would involve acquisition of the east study area for exclusive year-around military use except for public use of Amboy Road. All six alternatives involve the establishment of new SUA and the modification of existing airspace. Only the Sundance Military Operations Area (MOA) would be subject to modification of existing lateral dimensions, which is proposed under all six alternatives. All other proposed modifications to existing SUA under any of the alternatives would involve changes in vertical dimensions and times of use only. Alternative 3 would also involve reclassifying two areas. Under all alternatives, acquired airspace would be returned to Federal Aviation Administration control to be made available for commercial and general aviation when not being used by the Marine Corps. Two MEB exercises involving sustained combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training would be conducted each year under all six of the action alternatives with one MEB exercise involving 10,000 to 15,000 Marines likely to occur every six months. For alternatives that involve year-around exclusive military control of all or part of the west or east study areas (Alternatives 1, 2, 3, and 6), MEB building block training (including smaller-scale live fire and maneuver operations by units up to a single battalion in size) would occur in these acquired exclusive military use areas during times of the year that MEB exercises are not being conducted. Alternative 6, which is the preferred alternative, would require the acquisition of 146,667 acres in the west study area and 21,304 acres in the south study area. The land acquired within the west study area in Johnson Valley would be divided into a 38,137-acre area that would be open for restricted public access and use during periods when the MEB exercise is not occurring, and a 108,530-acre area for exclusive military use. The communications infrastructure that supports current Combat Center range operations would be extended into any acquired land via the proposed installation of two or three communications towers. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The acquisition of land contiguous to existing Combat Center operating areas would provide a sufficient area for realistic MEB-sized, sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training that meets at least the minimum threshold level training requirements within appropriate margins of safety. The modification and establishment of SUA would enable full integration of MEB-sized aviation combat operations and both air- and ground-delivered live-fire ordnance use within appropriate margins of safety. Implementation of the preferred alternative would preserve some public access to acquired lands in Johnson Valley. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in significant, unmitigable impacts to: land use, as a result of incompatibility with the Johnson Valley OHV Area Management Plan; recreation, as a result of loss of access to and the use of 57 percent of the Johnson Valley OHV Area; airspace management, as a result of the adverse effects of the proposed new and modified SUA; and air quality, as a result of nitrogen oxide emissions. Training activities would also have potential adverse effects on desert tortoises including total potential take of between 154 and 714 federally threatened desert tortoises over the life of the project. JF - EPA number: 110051, Draft EIS--941 pages, Appendices-625 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 18 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Desert Land KW - Emissions KW - Helicopters KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Munitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Threatened Species (Animals) KW - Vegetation KW - Weapon Systems KW - Wildlife KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Mojave Desert UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130408?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Marine Corps Air Ground Task Force Training Command, Twentynine Palms, California; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 17 of 26] T2 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873130396; 14807-1_0017 AB - PURPOSE: The establishment of a large-scale training range facility at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center (the Combat Center) at Twentynine Palms, California that would accommodate sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training for all elements of a Marine Expeditionary Brigade (MEB) is proposed. The Marine Corps would acquire additional land adjacent to the 600,000-acre Combat Center, establish and modify military special use airspace (SUA) above the proposed MEB-sized training range, and conduct the specified MEB training. The Combat Center is the place through which nearly all Marine Corps units rotate for training before deployment. While it has been the site of large-scale, combined-arms live-fire training in the past, it has insufficient land and airspace to meet MEB requirements. The Combat Center is located in the Mojave Desert in San Bernardino County 150 miles east of Los Angeles and 50 miles northeast of Palm Springs. The southern boundary of the installation is adjacent to the City of Twentynine Palms, six miles north of State Route 62. The northern boundary of the installation is located south of Interstate 40. The western boundary of the installation is adjacent to the Johnson Valley off-highway vehicle (OHV) area, which is administered by the Bureau of Land Management. The eastern boundary of the installation is located west of Amboy Road. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this draft EIS. Alternative 1 would involve exclusive year-around military use of the entire west study area; alternatives 2 and 6 would involve exclusive year-around military use of a portion of the west study area; and alternatives 4, 5, and 6 would permit some level of restricted public use in all or part of the west study area for 10 months of each year. All the action alternatives except Alternative 5 would also involve acquisition of the south study area for exclusive military use. Alternative 3 would involve acquisition of the east study area for exclusive year-around military use except for public use of Amboy Road. All six alternatives involve the establishment of new SUA and the modification of existing airspace. Only the Sundance Military Operations Area (MOA) would be subject to modification of existing lateral dimensions, which is proposed under all six alternatives. All other proposed modifications to existing SUA under any of the alternatives would involve changes in vertical dimensions and times of use only. Alternative 3 would also involve reclassifying two areas. Under all alternatives, acquired airspace would be returned to Federal Aviation Administration control to be made available for commercial and general aviation when not being used by the Marine Corps. Two MEB exercises involving sustained combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training would be conducted each year under all six of the action alternatives with one MEB exercise involving 10,000 to 15,000 Marines likely to occur every six months. For alternatives that involve year-around exclusive military control of all or part of the west or east study areas (Alternatives 1, 2, 3, and 6), MEB building block training (including smaller-scale live fire and maneuver operations by units up to a single battalion in size) would occur in these acquired exclusive military use areas during times of the year that MEB exercises are not being conducted. Alternative 6, which is the preferred alternative, would require the acquisition of 146,667 acres in the west study area and 21,304 acres in the south study area. The land acquired within the west study area in Johnson Valley would be divided into a 38,137-acre area that would be open for restricted public access and use during periods when the MEB exercise is not occurring, and a 108,530-acre area for exclusive military use. The communications infrastructure that supports current Combat Center range operations would be extended into any acquired land via the proposed installation of two or three communications towers. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The acquisition of land contiguous to existing Combat Center operating areas would provide a sufficient area for realistic MEB-sized, sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training that meets at least the minimum threshold level training requirements within appropriate margins of safety. The modification and establishment of SUA would enable full integration of MEB-sized aviation combat operations and both air- and ground-delivered live-fire ordnance use within appropriate margins of safety. Implementation of the preferred alternative would preserve some public access to acquired lands in Johnson Valley. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in significant, unmitigable impacts to: land use, as a result of incompatibility with the Johnson Valley OHV Area Management Plan; recreation, as a result of loss of access to and the use of 57 percent of the Johnson Valley OHV Area; airspace management, as a result of the adverse effects of the proposed new and modified SUA; and air quality, as a result of nitrogen oxide emissions. Training activities would also have potential adverse effects on desert tortoises including total potential take of between 154 and 714 federally threatened desert tortoises over the life of the project. JF - EPA number: 110051, Draft EIS--941 pages, Appendices-625 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 17 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Desert Land KW - Emissions KW - Helicopters KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Munitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Threatened Species (Animals) KW - Vegetation KW - Weapon Systems KW - Wildlife KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Mojave Desert UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130396?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Marine Corps Air Ground Task Force Training Command, Twentynine Palms, California; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 16 of 26] T2 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873130391; 14807-1_0016 AB - PURPOSE: The establishment of a large-scale training range facility at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center (the Combat Center) at Twentynine Palms, California that would accommodate sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training for all elements of a Marine Expeditionary Brigade (MEB) is proposed. The Marine Corps would acquire additional land adjacent to the 600,000-acre Combat Center, establish and modify military special use airspace (SUA) above the proposed MEB-sized training range, and conduct the specified MEB training. The Combat Center is the place through which nearly all Marine Corps units rotate for training before deployment. While it has been the site of large-scale, combined-arms live-fire training in the past, it has insufficient land and airspace to meet MEB requirements. The Combat Center is located in the Mojave Desert in San Bernardino County 150 miles east of Los Angeles and 50 miles northeast of Palm Springs. The southern boundary of the installation is adjacent to the City of Twentynine Palms, six miles north of State Route 62. The northern boundary of the installation is located south of Interstate 40. The western boundary of the installation is adjacent to the Johnson Valley off-highway vehicle (OHV) area, which is administered by the Bureau of Land Management. The eastern boundary of the installation is located west of Amboy Road. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this draft EIS. Alternative 1 would involve exclusive year-around military use of the entire west study area; alternatives 2 and 6 would involve exclusive year-around military use of a portion of the west study area; and alternatives 4, 5, and 6 would permit some level of restricted public use in all or part of the west study area for 10 months of each year. All the action alternatives except Alternative 5 would also involve acquisition of the south study area for exclusive military use. Alternative 3 would involve acquisition of the east study area for exclusive year-around military use except for public use of Amboy Road. All six alternatives involve the establishment of new SUA and the modification of existing airspace. Only the Sundance Military Operations Area (MOA) would be subject to modification of existing lateral dimensions, which is proposed under all six alternatives. All other proposed modifications to existing SUA under any of the alternatives would involve changes in vertical dimensions and times of use only. Alternative 3 would also involve reclassifying two areas. Under all alternatives, acquired airspace would be returned to Federal Aviation Administration control to be made available for commercial and general aviation when not being used by the Marine Corps. Two MEB exercises involving sustained combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training would be conducted each year under all six of the action alternatives with one MEB exercise involving 10,000 to 15,000 Marines likely to occur every six months. For alternatives that involve year-around exclusive military control of all or part of the west or east study areas (Alternatives 1, 2, 3, and 6), MEB building block training (including smaller-scale live fire and maneuver operations by units up to a single battalion in size) would occur in these acquired exclusive military use areas during times of the year that MEB exercises are not being conducted. Alternative 6, which is the preferred alternative, would require the acquisition of 146,667 acres in the west study area and 21,304 acres in the south study area. The land acquired within the west study area in Johnson Valley would be divided into a 38,137-acre area that would be open for restricted public access and use during periods when the MEB exercise is not occurring, and a 108,530-acre area for exclusive military use. The communications infrastructure that supports current Combat Center range operations would be extended into any acquired land via the proposed installation of two or three communications towers. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The acquisition of land contiguous to existing Combat Center operating areas would provide a sufficient area for realistic MEB-sized, sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training that meets at least the minimum threshold level training requirements within appropriate margins of safety. The modification and establishment of SUA would enable full integration of MEB-sized aviation combat operations and both air- and ground-delivered live-fire ordnance use within appropriate margins of safety. Implementation of the preferred alternative would preserve some public access to acquired lands in Johnson Valley. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in significant, unmitigable impacts to: land use, as a result of incompatibility with the Johnson Valley OHV Area Management Plan; recreation, as a result of loss of access to and the use of 57 percent of the Johnson Valley OHV Area; airspace management, as a result of the adverse effects of the proposed new and modified SUA; and air quality, as a result of nitrogen oxide emissions. Training activities would also have potential adverse effects on desert tortoises including total potential take of between 154 and 714 federally threatened desert tortoises over the life of the project. JF - EPA number: 110051, Draft EIS--941 pages, Appendices-625 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 16 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Desert Land KW - Emissions KW - Helicopters KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Munitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Threatened Species (Animals) KW - Vegetation KW - Weapon Systems KW - Wildlife KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Mojave Desert UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130391?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Marine Corps Air Ground Task Force Training Command, Twentynine Palms, California; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 15 of 26] T2 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873130371; 14807-1_0015 AB - PURPOSE: The establishment of a large-scale training range facility at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center (the Combat Center) at Twentynine Palms, California that would accommodate sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training for all elements of a Marine Expeditionary Brigade (MEB) is proposed. The Marine Corps would acquire additional land adjacent to the 600,000-acre Combat Center, establish and modify military special use airspace (SUA) above the proposed MEB-sized training range, and conduct the specified MEB training. The Combat Center is the place through which nearly all Marine Corps units rotate for training before deployment. While it has been the site of large-scale, combined-arms live-fire training in the past, it has insufficient land and airspace to meet MEB requirements. The Combat Center is located in the Mojave Desert in San Bernardino County 150 miles east of Los Angeles and 50 miles northeast of Palm Springs. The southern boundary of the installation is adjacent to the City of Twentynine Palms, six miles north of State Route 62. The northern boundary of the installation is located south of Interstate 40. The western boundary of the installation is adjacent to the Johnson Valley off-highway vehicle (OHV) area, which is administered by the Bureau of Land Management. The eastern boundary of the installation is located west of Amboy Road. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this draft EIS. Alternative 1 would involve exclusive year-around military use of the entire west study area; alternatives 2 and 6 would involve exclusive year-around military use of a portion of the west study area; and alternatives 4, 5, and 6 would permit some level of restricted public use in all or part of the west study area for 10 months of each year. All the action alternatives except Alternative 5 would also involve acquisition of the south study area for exclusive military use. Alternative 3 would involve acquisition of the east study area for exclusive year-around military use except for public use of Amboy Road. All six alternatives involve the establishment of new SUA and the modification of existing airspace. Only the Sundance Military Operations Area (MOA) would be subject to modification of existing lateral dimensions, which is proposed under all six alternatives. All other proposed modifications to existing SUA under any of the alternatives would involve changes in vertical dimensions and times of use only. Alternative 3 would also involve reclassifying two areas. Under all alternatives, acquired airspace would be returned to Federal Aviation Administration control to be made available for commercial and general aviation when not being used by the Marine Corps. Two MEB exercises involving sustained combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training would be conducted each year under all six of the action alternatives with one MEB exercise involving 10,000 to 15,000 Marines likely to occur every six months. For alternatives that involve year-around exclusive military control of all or part of the west or east study areas (Alternatives 1, 2, 3, and 6), MEB building block training (including smaller-scale live fire and maneuver operations by units up to a single battalion in size) would occur in these acquired exclusive military use areas during times of the year that MEB exercises are not being conducted. Alternative 6, which is the preferred alternative, would require the acquisition of 146,667 acres in the west study area and 21,304 acres in the south study area. The land acquired within the west study area in Johnson Valley would be divided into a 38,137-acre area that would be open for restricted public access and use during periods when the MEB exercise is not occurring, and a 108,530-acre area for exclusive military use. The communications infrastructure that supports current Combat Center range operations would be extended into any acquired land via the proposed installation of two or three communications towers. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The acquisition of land contiguous to existing Combat Center operating areas would provide a sufficient area for realistic MEB-sized, sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training that meets at least the minimum threshold level training requirements within appropriate margins of safety. The modification and establishment of SUA would enable full integration of MEB-sized aviation combat operations and both air- and ground-delivered live-fire ordnance use within appropriate margins of safety. Implementation of the preferred alternative would preserve some public access to acquired lands in Johnson Valley. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in significant, unmitigable impacts to: land use, as a result of incompatibility with the Johnson Valley OHV Area Management Plan; recreation, as a result of loss of access to and the use of 57 percent of the Johnson Valley OHV Area; airspace management, as a result of the adverse effects of the proposed new and modified SUA; and air quality, as a result of nitrogen oxide emissions. Training activities would also have potential adverse effects on desert tortoises including total potential take of between 154 and 714 federally threatened desert tortoises over the life of the project. JF - EPA number: 110051, Draft EIS--941 pages, Appendices-625 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 15 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Desert Land KW - Emissions KW - Helicopters KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Munitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Threatened Species (Animals) KW - Vegetation KW - Weapon Systems KW - Wildlife KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Mojave Desert UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130371?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Marine Corps Air Ground Task Force Training Command, Twentynine Palms, California; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 14 of 26] T2 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873130365; 14807-1_0014 AB - PURPOSE: The establishment of a large-scale training range facility at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center (the Combat Center) at Twentynine Palms, California that would accommodate sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training for all elements of a Marine Expeditionary Brigade (MEB) is proposed. The Marine Corps would acquire additional land adjacent to the 600,000-acre Combat Center, establish and modify military special use airspace (SUA) above the proposed MEB-sized training range, and conduct the specified MEB training. The Combat Center is the place through which nearly all Marine Corps units rotate for training before deployment. While it has been the site of large-scale, combined-arms live-fire training in the past, it has insufficient land and airspace to meet MEB requirements. The Combat Center is located in the Mojave Desert in San Bernardino County 150 miles east of Los Angeles and 50 miles northeast of Palm Springs. The southern boundary of the installation is adjacent to the City of Twentynine Palms, six miles north of State Route 62. The northern boundary of the installation is located south of Interstate 40. The western boundary of the installation is adjacent to the Johnson Valley off-highway vehicle (OHV) area, which is administered by the Bureau of Land Management. The eastern boundary of the installation is located west of Amboy Road. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this draft EIS. Alternative 1 would involve exclusive year-around military use of the entire west study area; alternatives 2 and 6 would involve exclusive year-around military use of a portion of the west study area; and alternatives 4, 5, and 6 would permit some level of restricted public use in all or part of the west study area for 10 months of each year. All the action alternatives except Alternative 5 would also involve acquisition of the south study area for exclusive military use. Alternative 3 would involve acquisition of the east study area for exclusive year-around military use except for public use of Amboy Road. All six alternatives involve the establishment of new SUA and the modification of existing airspace. Only the Sundance Military Operations Area (MOA) would be subject to modification of existing lateral dimensions, which is proposed under all six alternatives. All other proposed modifications to existing SUA under any of the alternatives would involve changes in vertical dimensions and times of use only. Alternative 3 would also involve reclassifying two areas. Under all alternatives, acquired airspace would be returned to Federal Aviation Administration control to be made available for commercial and general aviation when not being used by the Marine Corps. Two MEB exercises involving sustained combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training would be conducted each year under all six of the action alternatives with one MEB exercise involving 10,000 to 15,000 Marines likely to occur every six months. For alternatives that involve year-around exclusive military control of all or part of the west or east study areas (Alternatives 1, 2, 3, and 6), MEB building block training (including smaller-scale live fire and maneuver operations by units up to a single battalion in size) would occur in these acquired exclusive military use areas during times of the year that MEB exercises are not being conducted. Alternative 6, which is the preferred alternative, would require the acquisition of 146,667 acres in the west study area and 21,304 acres in the south study area. The land acquired within the west study area in Johnson Valley would be divided into a 38,137-acre area that would be open for restricted public access and use during periods when the MEB exercise is not occurring, and a 108,530-acre area for exclusive military use. The communications infrastructure that supports current Combat Center range operations would be extended into any acquired land via the proposed installation of two or three communications towers. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The acquisition of land contiguous to existing Combat Center operating areas would provide a sufficient area for realistic MEB-sized, sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training that meets at least the minimum threshold level training requirements within appropriate margins of safety. The modification and establishment of SUA would enable full integration of MEB-sized aviation combat operations and both air- and ground-delivered live-fire ordnance use within appropriate margins of safety. Implementation of the preferred alternative would preserve some public access to acquired lands in Johnson Valley. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in significant, unmitigable impacts to: land use, as a result of incompatibility with the Johnson Valley OHV Area Management Plan; recreation, as a result of loss of access to and the use of 57 percent of the Johnson Valley OHV Area; airspace management, as a result of the adverse effects of the proposed new and modified SUA; and air quality, as a result of nitrogen oxide emissions. Training activities would also have potential adverse effects on desert tortoises including total potential take of between 154 and 714 federally threatened desert tortoises over the life of the project. JF - EPA number: 110051, Draft EIS--941 pages, Appendices-625 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 14 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Desert Land KW - Emissions KW - Helicopters KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Munitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Threatened Species (Animals) KW - Vegetation KW - Weapon Systems KW - Wildlife KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Mojave Desert UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130365?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Marine Corps Air Ground Task Force Training Command, Twentynine Palms, California; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - YERBA BUENA ISLAND RAMPS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ON INTERSTATE 80 (I-80), CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. AN - 859052018; 14800 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the existing westbound on-ramp and the westbound off-ramp connecting to Interstate 80 (I-80) on the eastern side of Yerba Buena Island (YBI), San Francisco, California is proposed. YBI is located in the San Francisco Bay, halfway between Oakland and San Francisco, and is accessible by vehicles only via the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge (SFOBB), which is part of I-80. The SFOBB is a critical link in the interstate network, providing access between San Francisco and the East Bay. YBI and Treasure Island, which lies to the north, are accessed by on-and off-ramps located on the upper and lower decks of the SFOBB. The SFOBB and the on- and off-ramps provide the only land access to the active U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) facilities located on the southern side of YBI. Geometric and operational deficiencies of the existing ramps have resulted in accident rates higher than the statewide rate for similar facilities and the westbound on-ramp merge lengths and off-ramp deceleration lengths do not meet current California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) standards. Projections of 2035 traffic volumes indicate ramp operations at a failing level of service in both the morning and evening peak hours. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives are evaluated in this draft EIS. Alternative 2b would include removal of the existing westbound on- and off-ramps, construction of a westbound hook on-ramp from Macalla Road, and construction of a westbound off-ramp to Macalla Road. The westbound on-ramp would begin at a "T" intersection at Macalla Road, loop right with a tight radius, and merge on to the north side of the Bay Bridge. The length of this ramp would be 867 feet and it would have two traffic lanes, merging into one as it connects to the SFOBB. One lane would be a high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane and the other a mixed-flow lane. The westbound off-ramp would diverge from the new SFOBB transition structure and terminate at a "T" intersection at Macalla Road. The length of this ramp would be 1,115 feet and a stop sign is proposed at the ramp terminus. Macalla Road would be widened for 662 feet adjacent to the terminus of the westbound on- and off-ramps to accommodate a future 12-foot-wide multi-use pedestrian/bike path and two 12-foot-wide lanes within the Caltrans right-of-way. A retaining wall would be constructed to provide the required width and retain the hillside above Macalla Road. The roadway width would vary around the curve at South Gate Road to provide proper width for truck turning movements. The westbound on- and off-ramps would terminate at Macalla Road where Quarters 10/Building 267 are currently located, requiring their removal. Under Alternative 4, the westbound on-ramp would begin at South Gate Road, proceed east paralleling the eastbound on-ramp, loop under the new SFOBB transition structure near its eastern end to provide adequate merging distances, and cross over the westbound off-ramp along the north side of the Bay Bridge. The length of this ramp would be 2,884 feet. An HOV lane would not be provided. The westbound off-ramp would diverge from the new SFOBB transition structure, parallel the transition structure, cross under the westbound on-ramp, and terminate at a "T" intersection at North Gate Road. The length of this ramp would be 1,168 feet and a stop sign is proposed at the ramp terminus. An HOV lane would not be provided. Quarters 10/Building 267 and associated landscaping would remain in place. Total costs for Alternative 2b and Alternative 4 are estimated at $79 million and $159 million, respectively. The right-of-way capital costs include easements from the USCG for both alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Ramp replacement would increase traffic safety by improving the geometry and operations of the westbound on- and off-ramps. Temporarily disturbed woodland and forested areas would be restored after completion of construction activities. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities would have temporary noise and traffic impacts including detours and single-lane closures. Three historic properties (Senior Officers Quarters Historic District, Quarters 1/Nimitz House, and Quarters 10/Building 267) would be adversely affected. Under Alternative 2b, Quarters 10/Building 267) would be acquired, removed, and relocated. Under Alternative 4, ramps would be directly above the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commissions 100-foot shoreline band. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and General Bridge Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 535). JF - EPA number: 110044, Volume I--688 pages and maps, Volume II--1,356 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Easements KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Islands KW - Military Facilities (Coast Guard) KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - California KW - San Francisco Bay KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - General Bridge Act of 1946, Coast Guard Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/859052018?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=YERBA+BUENA+ISLAND+RAMPS+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT+ON+INTERSTATE+80+%28I-80%29%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=YERBA+BUENA+ISLAND+RAMPS+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT+ON+INTERSTATE+80+%28I-80%29%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - California Department of Transportation, Oakland, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 2009). AN - 859052016; 14810 AB - PURPOSE: Transit service improvements in the heavily-traveled Crenshaw Transit Corridor in Los Angeles County, California are proposed. The study area encompasses 33 square miles and portions of five jurisdictions: the cities of Los Angeles, Inglewood, Hawthorne, and El Segundo, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Three major interstate highways traverse the area including the Santa Monica Freeway and Glenn Anderson Freeway running east-west, and the San Diego Freeway which runs north-south. The Harbor Freeway parallels the corridor, running north-south immediately east of the area. A September 2009 draft EIS analyzed a No Build Alternative, a low-cost transportation system management (TSM) alternative, a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Alternative, and a Light Rail Transit (LRT) Alternative. In December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted LRT as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Station to the Exposition LRT line (under construction) at the Exposition/Crenshaw Boulevards intersection. The LRT alignment would be doubletracked and would be comprised of at-grade street, at-grade railroad, aerial, and below-grade sections. This supplemental draft EIS presents additional information pertaining to the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor Project, previously known as the Crenshaw Transit Corridor Project. Specifically, four new alternative maintenance facility sites are analyzed and historic resources and parklands are evaluated for the area of potential effects. The four new alternative maintenance facility sites include: 1) Site 14 - the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative, a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the City of Los Angeles; 2) Site 15 - the Manchester/Aviation Alternative, a 20.5-acre industrial use site located in the City of Inglewood; 3) Site 17 - the Marine/Redondo Beach Alternative, a 14.2-acre industrial use site located in the City of Redondo Beach; and 4) the Division 22 Northern Expansion Alternative, a 3.5-acre industrial use site located in the City of Hawthorne. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of an effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems affecting corridor residents and businesses by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. None of the maintenance site alternatives would result in the displacement of any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The Site 14, Site 15, Site 17, and Division 22 maintenance facility site alternatives would require acquisition of 12, 39, four, and four parcels, respectively. The displacement of businesses may result in the loss of five to 390 employees without the implementation of mitigation measures. There would be potential for indirect significant impacts to businesses that are airport-related or dependent if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Uniform Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0435D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110054, Supplemental Draft EIS--204 pages, Appendices--558 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Noise KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/859052016?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+SEPTEMBER+2009%29.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+SEPTEMBER+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER LAND ACQUISITION AND AIRSPACE ESTABLISHMENT TO SUPPORT LARGE-SCALE MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE LIVE FIRE AND MANEUVER TRAINING, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 16367488; 14807 AB - PURPOSE: The establishment of a large-scale training range facility at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center (the Combat Center) at Twentynine Palms, California that would accommodate sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training for all elements of a Marine Expeditionary Brigade (MEB) is proposed. The Marine Corps would acquire additional land adjacent to the 600,000-acre Combat Center, establish and modify military special use airspace (SUA) above the proposed MEB-sized training range, and conduct the specified MEB training. The Combat Center is the place through which nearly all Marine Corps units rotate for training before deployment. While it has been the site of large-scale, combined-arms live-fire training in the past, it has insufficient land and airspace to meet MEB requirements. The Combat Center is located in the Mojave Desert in San Bernardino County 150 miles east of Los Angeles and 50 miles northeast of Palm Springs. The southern boundary of the installation is adjacent to the City of Twentynine Palms, six miles north of State Route 62. The northern boundary of the installation is located south of Interstate 40. The western boundary of the installation is adjacent to the Johnson Valley off-highway vehicle (OHV) area, which is administered by the Bureau of Land Management. The eastern boundary of the installation is located west of Amboy Road. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this draft EIS. Alternative 1 would involve exclusive year-around military use of the entire west study area; alternatives 2 and 6 would involve exclusive year-around military use of a portion of the west study area; and alternatives 4, 5, and 6 would permit some level of restricted public use in all or part of the west study area for 10 months of each year. All the action alternatives except Alternative 5 would also involve acquisition of the south study area for exclusive military use. Alternative 3 would involve acquisition of the east study area for exclusive year-around military use except for public use of Amboy Road. All six alternatives involve the establishment of new SUA and the modification of existing airspace. Only the Sundance Military Operations Area (MOA) would be subject to modification of existing lateral dimensions, which is proposed under all six alternatives. All other proposed modifications to existing SUA under any of the alternatives would involve changes in vertical dimensions and times of use only. Alternative 3 would also involve reclassifying two areas. Under all alternatives, acquired airspace would be returned to Federal Aviation Administration control to be made available for commercial and general aviation when not being used by the Marine Corps. Two MEB exercises involving sustained combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training would be conducted each year under all six of the action alternatives with one MEB exercise involving 10,000 to 15,000 Marines likely to occur every six months. For alternatives that involve year-around exclusive military control of all or part of the west or east study areas (Alternatives 1, 2, 3, and 6), MEB building block training (including smaller-scale live fire and maneuver operations by units up to a single battalion in size) would occur in these acquired exclusive military use areas during times of the year that MEB exercises are not being conducted. Alternative 6, which is the preferred alternative, would require the acquisition of 146,667 acres in the west study area and 21,304 acres in the south study area. The land acquired within the west study area in Johnson Valley would be divided into a 38,137-acre area that would be open for restricted public access and use during periods when the MEB exercise is not occurring, and a 108,530-acre area for exclusive military use. The communications infrastructure that supports current Combat Center range operations would be extended into any acquired land via the proposed installation of two or three communications towers. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The acquisition of land contiguous to existing Combat Center operating areas would provide a sufficient area for realistic MEB-sized, sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver training that meets at least the minimum threshold level training requirements within appropriate margins of safety. The modification and establishment of SUA would enable full integration of MEB-sized aviation combat operations and both air- and ground-delivered live-fire ordnance use within appropriate margins of safety. Implementation of the preferred alternative would preserve some public access to acquired lands in Johnson Valley. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in significant, unmitigable impacts to: land use, as a result of incompatibility with the Johnson Valley OHV Area Management Plan; recreation, as a result of loss of access to and the use of 57 percent of the Johnson Valley OHV Area; airspace management, as a result of the adverse effects of the proposed new and modified SUA; and air quality, as a result of nitrogen oxide emissions. Training activities would also have potential adverse effects on desert tortoises including total potential take of between 154 and 714 federally threatened desert tortoises over the life of the project. JF - EPA number: 110051, Draft EIS--941 pages, Appendices-625 pages, February 25, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Desert Land KW - Emissions KW - Helicopters KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Munitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Threatened Species (Animals) KW - Vegetation KW - Weapon Systems KW - Wildlife KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Mojave Desert UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/16367488?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=MARINE+CORPS+AIR+GROUND+COMBAT+CENTER+LAND+ACQUISITION+AND+AIRSPACE+ESTABLISHMENT+TO+SUPPORT+LARGE-SCALE+MARINE+AIR+GROUND+TASK+FORCE+LIVE+FIRE+AND+MANEUVER+TRAINING%2C+SAN+BERNARDINO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Marine Corps Air Ground Task Force Training Command, Twentynine Palms, California; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). [Part 29 of 29] T2 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). AN - 873129296; 14794-8_0029 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction of Interstate 94 (I-94) from 124th Street to 70th Street and the US Highway 45/I-894 corridor from Lincoln Avenue to Burleigh Street in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin is proposed. The study area encompasses the Zoo Interchange and its four approaches, referred to as the east, west, north, and south legs. The west terminus of the project is 124th Street, and the east terminus is 70th Street, a distance of about 3.5 miles. The south terminus is Lincoln Avenue, and the north terminus is Burleigh Street, a distance of about 5.5 miles. The scope of the project includes rebuilding the mainline roadway and bridges; modifying interchange access to improve safety and traffic flow; reconstructing POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would maintain a key link in the local, state, and national transportation network; address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system to improve safety; replace deteriorating pavement and bridges; and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way, totaling 55 to 74 acres within the study area, would need to be acquired. Acquisition of six to 31 residences would be required to implement the 6-lane Modernization Alternative, six to 32 residences would be needed for the 8-lane Modernization Alternative, and eight residences and three businesses would be needed for the Reduced Impacts Alternative. The adjacent arterials component would require acquisition of one commercial building containing two businesses. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. In some areas, design year noise levels could increase by as much as 14 decibels over existing levels. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0468D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110038, Supplemental Draft EIS--353 pages, Appendices--247 pages, February 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 29 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-SD KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129296?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.title=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). [Part 28 of 29] T2 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). AN - 873129270; 14794-8_0028 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction of Interstate 94 (I-94) from 124th Street to 70th Street and the US Highway 45/I-894 corridor from Lincoln Avenue to Burleigh Street in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin is proposed. The study area encompasses the Zoo Interchange and its four approaches, referred to as the east, west, north, and south legs. The west terminus of the project is 124th Street, and the east terminus is 70th Street, a distance of about 3.5 miles. The south terminus is Lincoln Avenue, and the north terminus is Burleigh Street, a distance of about 5.5 miles. The scope of the project includes rebuilding the mainline roadway and bridges; modifying interchange access to improve safety and traffic flow; reconstructing POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would maintain a key link in the local, state, and national transportation network; address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system to improve safety; replace deteriorating pavement and bridges; and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way, totaling 55 to 74 acres within the study area, would need to be acquired. Acquisition of six to 31 residences would be required to implement the 6-lane Modernization Alternative, six to 32 residences would be needed for the 8-lane Modernization Alternative, and eight residences and three businesses would be needed for the Reduced Impacts Alternative. The adjacent arterials component would require acquisition of one commercial building containing two businesses. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. In some areas, design year noise levels could increase by as much as 14 decibels over existing levels. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0468D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110038, Supplemental Draft EIS--353 pages, Appendices--247 pages, February 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 28 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-SD KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129270?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.title=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). [Part 10 of 29] T2 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). AN - 873129239; 14794-8_0010 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction of Interstate 94 (I-94) from 124th Street to 70th Street and the US Highway 45/I-894 corridor from Lincoln Avenue to Burleigh Street in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin is proposed. The study area encompasses the Zoo Interchange and its four approaches, referred to as the east, west, north, and south legs. The west terminus of the project is 124th Street, and the east terminus is 70th Street, a distance of about 3.5 miles. The south terminus is Lincoln Avenue, and the north terminus is Burleigh Street, a distance of about 5.5 miles. The scope of the project includes rebuilding the mainline roadway and bridges; modifying interchange access to improve safety and traffic flow; reconstructing POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would maintain a key link in the local, state, and national transportation network; address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system to improve safety; replace deteriorating pavement and bridges; and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way, totaling 55 to 74 acres within the study area, would need to be acquired. Acquisition of six to 31 residences would be required to implement the 6-lane Modernization Alternative, six to 32 residences would be needed for the 8-lane Modernization Alternative, and eight residences and three businesses would be needed for the Reduced Impacts Alternative. The adjacent arterials component would require acquisition of one commercial building containing two businesses. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. In some areas, design year noise levels could increase by as much as 14 decibels over existing levels. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0468D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110038, Supplemental Draft EIS--353 pages, Appendices--247 pages, February 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-SD KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129239?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.title=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). [Part 9 of 29] T2 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). AN - 873129213; 14794-8_0009 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction of Interstate 94 (I-94) from 124th Street to 70th Street and the US Highway 45/I-894 corridor from Lincoln Avenue to Burleigh Street in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin is proposed. The study area encompasses the Zoo Interchange and its four approaches, referred to as the east, west, north, and south legs. The west terminus of the project is 124th Street, and the east terminus is 70th Street, a distance of about 3.5 miles. The south terminus is Lincoln Avenue, and the north terminus is Burleigh Street, a distance of about 5.5 miles. The scope of the project includes rebuilding the mainline roadway and bridges; modifying interchange access to improve safety and traffic flow; reconstructing POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would maintain a key link in the local, state, and national transportation network; address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system to improve safety; replace deteriorating pavement and bridges; and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way, totaling 55 to 74 acres within the study area, would need to be acquired. Acquisition of six to 31 residences would be required to implement the 6-lane Modernization Alternative, six to 32 residences would be needed for the 8-lane Modernization Alternative, and eight residences and three businesses would be needed for the Reduced Impacts Alternative. The adjacent arterials component would require acquisition of one commercial building containing two businesses. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. In some areas, design year noise levels could increase by as much as 14 decibels over existing levels. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0468D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110038, Supplemental Draft EIS--353 pages, Appendices--247 pages, February 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-SD KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129213?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.title=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). [Part 8 of 29] T2 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). AN - 873129185; 14794-8_0008 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction of Interstate 94 (I-94) from 124th Street to 70th Street and the US Highway 45/I-894 corridor from Lincoln Avenue to Burleigh Street in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin is proposed. The study area encompasses the Zoo Interchange and its four approaches, referred to as the east, west, north, and south legs. The west terminus of the project is 124th Street, and the east terminus is 70th Street, a distance of about 3.5 miles. The south terminus is Lincoln Avenue, and the north terminus is Burleigh Street, a distance of about 5.5 miles. The scope of the project includes rebuilding the mainline roadway and bridges; modifying interchange access to improve safety and traffic flow; reconstructing POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would maintain a key link in the local, state, and national transportation network; address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system to improve safety; replace deteriorating pavement and bridges; and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way, totaling 55 to 74 acres within the study area, would need to be acquired. Acquisition of six to 31 residences would be required to implement the 6-lane Modernization Alternative, six to 32 residences would be needed for the 8-lane Modernization Alternative, and eight residences and three businesses would be needed for the Reduced Impacts Alternative. The adjacent arterials component would require acquisition of one commercial building containing two businesses. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. In some areas, design year noise levels could increase by as much as 14 decibels over existing levels. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0468D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110038, Supplemental Draft EIS--353 pages, Appendices--247 pages, February 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-SD KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129185?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.title=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). [Part 7 of 29] T2 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). AN - 873129169; 14794-8_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction of Interstate 94 (I-94) from 124th Street to 70th Street and the US Highway 45/I-894 corridor from Lincoln Avenue to Burleigh Street in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin is proposed. The study area encompasses the Zoo Interchange and its four approaches, referred to as the east, west, north, and south legs. The west terminus of the project is 124th Street, and the east terminus is 70th Street, a distance of about 3.5 miles. The south terminus is Lincoln Avenue, and the north terminus is Burleigh Street, a distance of about 5.5 miles. The scope of the project includes rebuilding the mainline roadway and bridges; modifying interchange access to improve safety and traffic flow; reconstructing POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would maintain a key link in the local, state, and national transportation network; address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system to improve safety; replace deteriorating pavement and bridges; and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way, totaling 55 to 74 acres within the study area, would need to be acquired. Acquisition of six to 31 residences would be required to implement the 6-lane Modernization Alternative, six to 32 residences would be needed for the 8-lane Modernization Alternative, and eight residences and three businesses would be needed for the Reduced Impacts Alternative. The adjacent arterials component would require acquisition of one commercial building containing two businesses. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. In some areas, design year noise levels could increase by as much as 14 decibels over existing levels. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0468D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110038, Supplemental Draft EIS--353 pages, Appendices--247 pages, February 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-SD KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129169?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.title=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). [Part 3 of 29] T2 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). AN - 873129143; 14794-8_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction of Interstate 94 (I-94) from 124th Street to 70th Street and the US Highway 45/I-894 corridor from Lincoln Avenue to Burleigh Street in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin is proposed. The study area encompasses the Zoo Interchange and its four approaches, referred to as the east, west, north, and south legs. The west terminus of the project is 124th Street, and the east terminus is 70th Street, a distance of about 3.5 miles. The south terminus is Lincoln Avenue, and the north terminus is Burleigh Street, a distance of about 5.5 miles. The scope of the project includes rebuilding the mainline roadway and bridges; modifying interchange access to improve safety and traffic flow; reconstructing POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would maintain a key link in the local, state, and national transportation network; address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system to improve safety; replace deteriorating pavement and bridges; and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way, totaling 55 to 74 acres within the study area, would need to be acquired. Acquisition of six to 31 residences would be required to implement the 6-lane Modernization Alternative, six to 32 residences would be needed for the 8-lane Modernization Alternative, and eight residences and three businesses would be needed for the Reduced Impacts Alternative. The adjacent arterials component would require acquisition of one commercial building containing two businesses. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. In some areas, design year noise levels could increase by as much as 14 decibels over existing levels. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0468D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110038, Supplemental Draft EIS--353 pages, Appendices--247 pages, February 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-SD KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129143?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.title=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND CANYON NATIONAL PARK SPECIAL FLIGHT RULES AREA, COCONINO COUNTY, ARIZONA. [Part 3 of 6] T2 - GRAND CANYON NATIONAL PARK SPECIAL FLIGHT RULES AREA, COCONINO COUNTY, ARIZONA. AN - 873129120; 14792-6_0003 AB - PURPOSE: Special flight rules for the management of overflight activity to substantially restore natural quiet in Grand Canyon National Park (GCNP), Coconino County, Arizona are proposed. GCNP, established in 1919, encompasses 1,216,000 acres of public land on the Colorado Plateaus southern end, and is a globally significant natural resource containing scenic vistas known throughout the world. More than four million recreational park visits occur yearly. The 1987 National Parks Overflights Act requires restoration of natural quiet and visitor experience in GCNP and mandates that the Secretary of the Interior submit to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) recommendations regarding actions necessary for the protection of resources in the Grand Canyon from adverse impacts associated with aircraft overflights. The National Parks Air Tour Management Act of 2000 affirmed that requirement, and required the FAA to designate reasonably achievable requirements for fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters to employ quiet-aircraft technology. It also called for the FAA, in consultation with the National Parks Service (NPS) and the Grand Canyon Working Group, to create incentive routes for commercial air-tour quiet-technology aircraft operating in GCNP, as long as the routes do not negatively impact substantial restoration of natural quiet, tribal lands, or safety. Actions since 1987 have reduced adverse effects of aircraft overflights with the current condition peak day achieving 55 percent restoration of natural quiet. However, NPS is concerned that sensitive natural and cultural resources and ground-based visitors in some park areas continue to be adversely affected by aircraft overflights. The study area is 140 miles east-west and 85 miles north-south, and encompasses GCNP as well as adjacent tribal and other federal lands. Substantial restoration of natural quiet is defined as a reduction of noise from aircraft operations at or below 17,999 feet mean sea level within the Special Flight Rules Area (SFRA) resulting in 50 percent or more of the park achieving restoration of natural quiet (i.e., no aircraft audible) for 75 percent to 100 percent of the day, each and every day. Fifty percent of the park is the minimum restoration goal. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. Under Alternative A, all aspects of current management for general aviation and air-tour operations in the SFRA would continue with no requirements or incentives to use quiet-technology aircraft. Operations would continue in the SFRAs East End from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m., May through September, and 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., October through April. There would be no limits on daily or seasonal allowable operation times in the West End and no maximum daily cap. The air-tour annual allocation would continue to be 93,971 flights. Alternative E would implement seasonal air-tour route use, maximize GCNP area in flight-free zones, and reduce hours and area available for air-tour overflights. A mix of curfews and conversion to best available quiet technology aircraft would be implemented to achieve project objectives. Alternative E would allow a daily maximum 364 total operations by air-tour and air-tour-related flights in the SFRA, and an annual maximum 93,971 flights. Alternative F minimizes changes from current practices but would include Dragon Corridor seasonal shifts, one general-aviation corridor closure, and quiet-technology incentives. Alternative F would have the same annual allocation provision of 93,971 commercial air-tour operations, but there would be no daily cap. The preferred alternative would implement rules for alternating use of Zuni Point and Dragon Corridors for short-loop tours, raising flight-free zone upper boundaries to 18,000 feet, quiet-technology incentives, modified tour routes to avoid sensitive resources, modified curfews, full conversion to quiet-technology aircraft, and moving most non-tour flights outside the SFRA. Air-tours and air-tour-related operations would have an annual allocation limit of 65,000 flights, with a daily cap of 364 air-tours. Under all alternatives, operations in support of the Hualapai Tribe would continue exempt from annual allocations and daily caps. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would restore natural quiet and experience at GCNP while maintaining compliance with FAA laws, regulations and policies regarding aviation safety and airspace management. Under the preferred alternative, a range of tours year-round, and iconic views would be available for aerial viewing from a variety of routes. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Overflights would continue to adversely affect wildlife to varying degrees in different sections of GCNP. Species affected include peregrine falcon, California condor, and Mexican spotted owl. More restrictive regulation would have long-term, minor to moderate effects on air tour operators, Native American tribes, and general aviation in the study area. LEGAL MANDATES: National Park Service Organic Act of 1916 (16 U.S.C. 1 et seq.), National Parks Air Tour Management Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-181), and National Parks Overflights Act of 1987 (P.L. 100-91). JF - EPA number: 110036, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--671 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume 2)--341 pages, February 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 3 KW - Air Transportation KW - Agency number: DES 10-60 KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Birds KW - Helicopters KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Indian Reservations KW - National Parks KW - Noise Assessments KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Regulations KW - Transportation KW - Wild and Scenic Rivers KW - Wilderness KW - Wilderness Management KW - Wildlife KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arizona KW - Grand Canyon National Park KW - National Park Service Organic Act of 1916, Compliance KW - National Parks Air Tour Management Act of 2000, Compliance KW - National Parks Overflights Act of 1987, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129120?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+CANYON+NATIONAL+PARK+SPECIAL+FLIGHT+RULES+AREA%2C+COCONINO+COUNTY%2C+ARIZONA.&rft.title=GRAND+CANYON+NATIONAL+PARK+SPECIAL+FLIGHT+RULES+AREA%2C+COCONINO+COUNTY%2C+ARIZONA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Grand Canyon, Arizona; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND CANYON NATIONAL PARK SPECIAL FLIGHT RULES AREA, COCONINO COUNTY, ARIZONA. [Part 2 of 6] T2 - GRAND CANYON NATIONAL PARK SPECIAL FLIGHT RULES AREA, COCONINO COUNTY, ARIZONA. AN - 873129092; 14792-6_0002 AB - PURPOSE: Special flight rules for the management of overflight activity to substantially restore natural quiet in Grand Canyon National Park (GCNP), Coconino County, Arizona are proposed. GCNP, established in 1919, encompasses 1,216,000 acres of public land on the Colorado Plateaus southern end, and is a globally significant natural resource containing scenic vistas known throughout the world. More than four million recreational park visits occur yearly. The 1987 National Parks Overflights Act requires restoration of natural quiet and visitor experience in GCNP and mandates that the Secretary of the Interior submit to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) recommendations regarding actions necessary for the protection of resources in the Grand Canyon from adverse impacts associated with aircraft overflights. The National Parks Air Tour Management Act of 2000 affirmed that requirement, and required the FAA to designate reasonably achievable requirements for fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters to employ quiet-aircraft technology. It also called for the FAA, in consultation with the National Parks Service (NPS) and the Grand Canyon Working Group, to create incentive routes for commercial air-tour quiet-technology aircraft operating in GCNP, as long as the routes do not negatively impact substantial restoration of natural quiet, tribal lands, or safety. Actions since 1987 have reduced adverse effects of aircraft overflights with the current condition peak day achieving 55 percent restoration of natural quiet. However, NPS is concerned that sensitive natural and cultural resources and ground-based visitors in some park areas continue to be adversely affected by aircraft overflights. The study area is 140 miles east-west and 85 miles north-south, and encompasses GCNP as well as adjacent tribal and other federal lands. Substantial restoration of natural quiet is defined as a reduction of noise from aircraft operations at or below 17,999 feet mean sea level within the Special Flight Rules Area (SFRA) resulting in 50 percent or more of the park achieving restoration of natural quiet (i.e., no aircraft audible) for 75 percent to 100 percent of the day, each and every day. Fifty percent of the park is the minimum restoration goal. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. Under Alternative A, all aspects of current management for general aviation and air-tour operations in the SFRA would continue with no requirements or incentives to use quiet-technology aircraft. Operations would continue in the SFRAs East End from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m., May through September, and 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., October through April. There would be no limits on daily or seasonal allowable operation times in the West End and no maximum daily cap. The air-tour annual allocation would continue to be 93,971 flights. Alternative E would implement seasonal air-tour route use, maximize GCNP area in flight-free zones, and reduce hours and area available for air-tour overflights. A mix of curfews and conversion to best available quiet technology aircraft would be implemented to achieve project objectives. Alternative E would allow a daily maximum 364 total operations by air-tour and air-tour-related flights in the SFRA, and an annual maximum 93,971 flights. Alternative F minimizes changes from current practices but would include Dragon Corridor seasonal shifts, one general-aviation corridor closure, and quiet-technology incentives. Alternative F would have the same annual allocation provision of 93,971 commercial air-tour operations, but there would be no daily cap. The preferred alternative would implement rules for alternating use of Zuni Point and Dragon Corridors for short-loop tours, raising flight-free zone upper boundaries to 18,000 feet, quiet-technology incentives, modified tour routes to avoid sensitive resources, modified curfews, full conversion to quiet-technology aircraft, and moving most non-tour flights outside the SFRA. Air-tours and air-tour-related operations would have an annual allocation limit of 65,000 flights, with a daily cap of 364 air-tours. Under all alternatives, operations in support of the Hualapai Tribe would continue exempt from annual allocations and daily caps. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would restore natural quiet and experience at GCNP while maintaining compliance with FAA laws, regulations and policies regarding aviation safety and airspace management. Under the preferred alternative, a range of tours year-round, and iconic views would be available for aerial viewing from a variety of routes. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Overflights would continue to adversely affect wildlife to varying degrees in different sections of GCNP. Species affected include peregrine falcon, California condor, and Mexican spotted owl. More restrictive regulation would have long-term, minor to moderate effects on air tour operators, Native American tribes, and general aviation in the study area. LEGAL MANDATES: National Park Service Organic Act of 1916 (16 U.S.C. 1 et seq.), National Parks Air Tour Management Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-181), and National Parks Overflights Act of 1987 (P.L. 100-91). JF - EPA number: 110036, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--671 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume 2)--341 pages, February 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Air Transportation KW - Agency number: DES 10-60 KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Birds KW - Helicopters KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Indian Reservations KW - National Parks KW - Noise Assessments KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Regulations KW - Transportation KW - Wild and Scenic Rivers KW - Wilderness KW - Wilderness Management KW - Wildlife KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arizona KW - Grand Canyon National Park KW - National Park Service Organic Act of 1916, Compliance KW - National Parks Air Tour Management Act of 2000, Compliance KW - National Parks Overflights Act of 1987, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129092?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+CANYON+NATIONAL+PARK+SPECIAL+FLIGHT+RULES+AREA%2C+COCONINO+COUNTY%2C+ARIZONA.&rft.title=GRAND+CANYON+NATIONAL+PARK+SPECIAL+FLIGHT+RULES+AREA%2C+COCONINO+COUNTY%2C+ARIZONA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Grand Canyon, Arizona; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). [Part 15 of 29] T2 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). AN - 873128312; 14794-8_0015 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction of Interstate 94 (I-94) from 124th Street to 70th Street and the US Highway 45/I-894 corridor from Lincoln Avenue to Burleigh Street in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin is proposed. The study area encompasses the Zoo Interchange and its four approaches, referred to as the east, west, north, and south legs. The west terminus of the project is 124th Street, and the east terminus is 70th Street, a distance of about 3.5 miles. The south terminus is Lincoln Avenue, and the north terminus is Burleigh Street, a distance of about 5.5 miles. The scope of the project includes rebuilding the mainline roadway and bridges; modifying interchange access to improve safety and traffic flow; reconstructing POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would maintain a key link in the local, state, and national transportation network; address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system to improve safety; replace deteriorating pavement and bridges; and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way, totaling 55 to 74 acres within the study area, would need to be acquired. Acquisition of six to 31 residences would be required to implement the 6-lane Modernization Alternative, six to 32 residences would be needed for the 8-lane Modernization Alternative, and eight residences and three businesses would be needed for the Reduced Impacts Alternative. The adjacent arterials component would require acquisition of one commercial building containing two businesses. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. In some areas, design year noise levels could increase by as much as 14 decibels over existing levels. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0468D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110038, Supplemental Draft EIS--353 pages, Appendices--247 pages, February 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-SD KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128312?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.title=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). [Part 14 of 29] T2 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). AN - 873128303; 14794-8_0014 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction of Interstate 94 (I-94) from 124th Street to 70th Street and the US Highway 45/I-894 corridor from Lincoln Avenue to Burleigh Street in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin is proposed. The study area encompasses the Zoo Interchange and its four approaches, referred to as the east, west, north, and south legs. The west terminus of the project is 124th Street, and the east terminus is 70th Street, a distance of about 3.5 miles. The south terminus is Lincoln Avenue, and the north terminus is Burleigh Street, a distance of about 5.5 miles. The scope of the project includes rebuilding the mainline roadway and bridges; modifying interchange access to improve safety and traffic flow; reconstructing POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would maintain a key link in the local, state, and national transportation network; address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system to improve safety; replace deteriorating pavement and bridges; and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way, totaling 55 to 74 acres within the study area, would need to be acquired. Acquisition of six to 31 residences would be required to implement the 6-lane Modernization Alternative, six to 32 residences would be needed for the 8-lane Modernization Alternative, and eight residences and three businesses would be needed for the Reduced Impacts Alternative. The adjacent arterials component would require acquisition of one commercial building containing two businesses. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. In some areas, design year noise levels could increase by as much as 14 decibels over existing levels. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0468D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110038, Supplemental Draft EIS--353 pages, Appendices--247 pages, February 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-SD KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128303?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.title=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). [Part 13 of 29] T2 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). AN - 873128295; 14794-8_0013 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction of Interstate 94 (I-94) from 124th Street to 70th Street and the US Highway 45/I-894 corridor from Lincoln Avenue to Burleigh Street in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin is proposed. The study area encompasses the Zoo Interchange and its four approaches, referred to as the east, west, north, and south legs. The west terminus of the project is 124th Street, and the east terminus is 70th Street, a distance of about 3.5 miles. The south terminus is Lincoln Avenue, and the north terminus is Burleigh Street, a distance of about 5.5 miles. The scope of the project includes rebuilding the mainline roadway and bridges; modifying interchange access to improve safety and traffic flow; reconstructing POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would maintain a key link in the local, state, and national transportation network; address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system to improve safety; replace deteriorating pavement and bridges; and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way, totaling 55 to 74 acres within the study area, would need to be acquired. Acquisition of six to 31 residences would be required to implement the 6-lane Modernization Alternative, six to 32 residences would be needed for the 8-lane Modernization Alternative, and eight residences and three businesses would be needed for the Reduced Impacts Alternative. The adjacent arterials component would require acquisition of one commercial building containing two businesses. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. In some areas, design year noise levels could increase by as much as 14 decibels over existing levels. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0468D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110038, Supplemental Draft EIS--353 pages, Appendices--247 pages, February 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 13 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-SD KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128295?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.title=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). [Part 12 of 29] T2 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). AN - 873128290; 14794-8_0012 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction of Interstate 94 (I-94) from 124th Street to 70th Street and the US Highway 45/I-894 corridor from Lincoln Avenue to Burleigh Street in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin is proposed. The study area encompasses the Zoo Interchange and its four approaches, referred to as the east, west, north, and south legs. The west terminus of the project is 124th Street, and the east terminus is 70th Street, a distance of about 3.5 miles. The south terminus is Lincoln Avenue, and the north terminus is Burleigh Street, a distance of about 5.5 miles. The scope of the project includes rebuilding the mainline roadway and bridges; modifying interchange access to improve safety and traffic flow; reconstructing POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would maintain a key link in the local, state, and national transportation network; address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system to improve safety; replace deteriorating pavement and bridges; and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way, totaling 55 to 74 acres within the study area, would need to be acquired. Acquisition of six to 31 residences would be required to implement the 6-lane Modernization Alternative, six to 32 residences would be needed for the 8-lane Modernization Alternative, and eight residences and three businesses would be needed for the Reduced Impacts Alternative. The adjacent arterials component would require acquisition of one commercial building containing two businesses. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. In some areas, design year noise levels could increase by as much as 14 decibels over existing levels. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0468D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110038, Supplemental Draft EIS--353 pages, Appendices--247 pages, February 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-SD KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128290?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.title=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). [Part 11 of 29] T2 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). AN - 873128284; 14794-8_0011 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction of Interstate 94 (I-94) from 124th Street to 70th Street and the US Highway 45/I-894 corridor from Lincoln Avenue to Burleigh Street in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin is proposed. The study area encompasses the Zoo Interchange and its four approaches, referred to as the east, west, north, and south legs. The west terminus of the project is 124th Street, and the east terminus is 70th Street, a distance of about 3.5 miles. The south terminus is Lincoln Avenue, and the north terminus is Burleigh Street, a distance of about 5.5 miles. The scope of the project includes rebuilding the mainline roadway and bridges; modifying interchange access to improve safety and traffic flow; reconstructing POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would maintain a key link in the local, state, and national transportation network; address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system to improve safety; replace deteriorating pavement and bridges; and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way, totaling 55 to 74 acres within the study area, would need to be acquired. Acquisition of six to 31 residences would be required to implement the 6-lane Modernization Alternative, six to 32 residences would be needed for the 8-lane Modernization Alternative, and eight residences and three businesses would be needed for the Reduced Impacts Alternative. The adjacent arterials component would require acquisition of one commercial building containing two businesses. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. In some areas, design year noise levels could increase by as much as 14 decibels over existing levels. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0468D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110038, Supplemental Draft EIS--353 pages, Appendices--247 pages, February 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-SD KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128284?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.title=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND CANYON NATIONAL PARK SPECIAL FLIGHT RULES AREA, COCONINO COUNTY, ARIZONA. [Part 1 of 6] T2 - GRAND CANYON NATIONAL PARK SPECIAL FLIGHT RULES AREA, COCONINO COUNTY, ARIZONA. AN - 873128272; 14792-6_0001 AB - PURPOSE: Special flight rules for the management of overflight activity to substantially restore natural quiet in Grand Canyon National Park (GCNP), Coconino County, Arizona are proposed. GCNP, established in 1919, encompasses 1,216,000 acres of public land on the Colorado Plateaus southern end, and is a globally significant natural resource containing scenic vistas known throughout the world. More than four million recreational park visits occur yearly. The 1987 National Parks Overflights Act requires restoration of natural quiet and visitor experience in GCNP and mandates that the Secretary of the Interior submit to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) recommendations regarding actions necessary for the protection of resources in the Grand Canyon from adverse impacts associated with aircraft overflights. The National Parks Air Tour Management Act of 2000 affirmed that requirement, and required the FAA to designate reasonably achievable requirements for fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters to employ quiet-aircraft technology. It also called for the FAA, in consultation with the National Parks Service (NPS) and the Grand Canyon Working Group, to create incentive routes for commercial air-tour quiet-technology aircraft operating in GCNP, as long as the routes do not negatively impact substantial restoration of natural quiet, tribal lands, or safety. Actions since 1987 have reduced adverse effects of aircraft overflights with the current condition peak day achieving 55 percent restoration of natural quiet. However, NPS is concerned that sensitive natural and cultural resources and ground-based visitors in some park areas continue to be adversely affected by aircraft overflights. The study area is 140 miles east-west and 85 miles north-south, and encompasses GCNP as well as adjacent tribal and other federal lands. Substantial restoration of natural quiet is defined as a reduction of noise from aircraft operations at or below 17,999 feet mean sea level within the Special Flight Rules Area (SFRA) resulting in 50 percent or more of the park achieving restoration of natural quiet (i.e., no aircraft audible) for 75 percent to 100 percent of the day, each and every day. Fifty percent of the park is the minimum restoration goal. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. Under Alternative A, all aspects of current management for general aviation and air-tour operations in the SFRA would continue with no requirements or incentives to use quiet-technology aircraft. Operations would continue in the SFRAs East End from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m., May through September, and 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., October through April. There would be no limits on daily or seasonal allowable operation times in the West End and no maximum daily cap. The air-tour annual allocation would continue to be 93,971 flights. Alternative E would implement seasonal air-tour route use, maximize GCNP area in flight-free zones, and reduce hours and area available for air-tour overflights. A mix of curfews and conversion to best available quiet technology aircraft would be implemented to achieve project objectives. Alternative E would allow a daily maximum 364 total operations by air-tour and air-tour-related flights in the SFRA, and an annual maximum 93,971 flights. Alternative F minimizes changes from current practices but would include Dragon Corridor seasonal shifts, one general-aviation corridor closure, and quiet-technology incentives. Alternative F would have the same annual allocation provision of 93,971 commercial air-tour operations, but there would be no daily cap. The preferred alternative would implement rules for alternating use of Zuni Point and Dragon Corridors for short-loop tours, raising flight-free zone upper boundaries to 18,000 feet, quiet-technology incentives, modified tour routes to avoid sensitive resources, modified curfews, full conversion to quiet-technology aircraft, and moving most non-tour flights outside the SFRA. Air-tours and air-tour-related operations would have an annual allocation limit of 65,000 flights, with a daily cap of 364 air-tours. Under all alternatives, operations in support of the Hualapai Tribe would continue exempt from annual allocations and daily caps. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would restore natural quiet and experience at GCNP while maintaining compliance with FAA laws, regulations and policies regarding aviation safety and airspace management. Under the preferred alternative, a range of tours year-round, and iconic views would be available for aerial viewing from a variety of routes. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Overflights would continue to adversely affect wildlife to varying degrees in different sections of GCNP. Species affected include peregrine falcon, California condor, and Mexican spotted owl. More restrictive regulation would have long-term, minor to moderate effects on air tour operators, Native American tribes, and general aviation in the study area. LEGAL MANDATES: National Park Service Organic Act of 1916 (16 U.S.C. 1 et seq.), National Parks Air Tour Management Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-181), and National Parks Overflights Act of 1987 (P.L. 100-91). JF - EPA number: 110036, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--671 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume 2)--341 pages, February 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Air Transportation KW - Agency number: DES 10-60 KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Birds KW - Helicopters KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Indian Reservations KW - National Parks KW - Noise Assessments KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Regulations KW - Transportation KW - Wild and Scenic Rivers KW - Wilderness KW - Wilderness Management KW - Wildlife KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arizona KW - Grand Canyon National Park KW - National Park Service Organic Act of 1916, Compliance KW - National Parks Air Tour Management Act of 2000, Compliance KW - National Parks Overflights Act of 1987, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128272?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+CANYON+NATIONAL+PARK+SPECIAL+FLIGHT+RULES+AREA%2C+COCONINO+COUNTY%2C+ARIZONA.&rft.title=GRAND+CANYON+NATIONAL+PARK+SPECIAL+FLIGHT+RULES+AREA%2C+COCONINO+COUNTY%2C+ARIZONA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Grand Canyon, Arizona; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). [Part 19 of 29] T2 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). AN - 873128178; 14794-8_0019 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction of Interstate 94 (I-94) from 124th Street to 70th Street and the US Highway 45/I-894 corridor from Lincoln Avenue to Burleigh Street in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin is proposed. The study area encompasses the Zoo Interchange and its four approaches, referred to as the east, west, north, and south legs. The west terminus of the project is 124th Street, and the east terminus is 70th Street, a distance of about 3.5 miles. The south terminus is Lincoln Avenue, and the north terminus is Burleigh Street, a distance of about 5.5 miles. The scope of the project includes rebuilding the mainline roadway and bridges; modifying interchange access to improve safety and traffic flow; reconstructing POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would maintain a key link in the local, state, and national transportation network; address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system to improve safety; replace deteriorating pavement and bridges; and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way, totaling 55 to 74 acres within the study area, would need to be acquired. Acquisition of six to 31 residences would be required to implement the 6-lane Modernization Alternative, six to 32 residences would be needed for the 8-lane Modernization Alternative, and eight residences and three businesses would be needed for the Reduced Impacts Alternative. The adjacent arterials component would require acquisition of one commercial building containing two businesses. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. In some areas, design year noise levels could increase by as much as 14 decibels over existing levels. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0468D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110038, Supplemental Draft EIS--353 pages, Appendices--247 pages, February 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 19 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-SD KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128178?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.title=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). [Part 18 of 29] T2 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). AN - 873128174; 14794-8_0018 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction of Interstate 94 (I-94) from 124th Street to 70th Street and the US Highway 45/I-894 corridor from Lincoln Avenue to Burleigh Street in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin is proposed. The study area encompasses the Zoo Interchange and its four approaches, referred to as the east, west, north, and south legs. The west terminus of the project is 124th Street, and the east terminus is 70th Street, a distance of about 3.5 miles. The south terminus is Lincoln Avenue, and the north terminus is Burleigh Street, a distance of about 5.5 miles. The scope of the project includes rebuilding the mainline roadway and bridges; modifying interchange access to improve safety and traffic flow; reconstructing POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would maintain a key link in the local, state, and national transportation network; address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system to improve safety; replace deteriorating pavement and bridges; and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way, totaling 55 to 74 acres within the study area, would need to be acquired. Acquisition of six to 31 residences would be required to implement the 6-lane Modernization Alternative, six to 32 residences would be needed for the 8-lane Modernization Alternative, and eight residences and three businesses would be needed for the Reduced Impacts Alternative. The adjacent arterials component would require acquisition of one commercial building containing two businesses. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. In some areas, design year noise levels could increase by as much as 14 decibels over existing levels. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0468D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110038, Supplemental Draft EIS--353 pages, Appendices--247 pages, February 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 18 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-SD KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128174?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.title=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). [Part 17 of 29] T2 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). AN - 873128161; 14794-8_0017 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction of Interstate 94 (I-94) from 124th Street to 70th Street and the US Highway 45/I-894 corridor from Lincoln Avenue to Burleigh Street in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin is proposed. The study area encompasses the Zoo Interchange and its four approaches, referred to as the east, west, north, and south legs. The west terminus of the project is 124th Street, and the east terminus is 70th Street, a distance of about 3.5 miles. The south terminus is Lincoln Avenue, and the north terminus is Burleigh Street, a distance of about 5.5 miles. The scope of the project includes rebuilding the mainline roadway and bridges; modifying interchange access to improve safety and traffic flow; reconstructing POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would maintain a key link in the local, state, and national transportation network; address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system to improve safety; replace deteriorating pavement and bridges; and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way, totaling 55 to 74 acres within the study area, would need to be acquired. Acquisition of six to 31 residences would be required to implement the 6-lane Modernization Alternative, six to 32 residences would be needed for the 8-lane Modernization Alternative, and eight residences and three businesses would be needed for the Reduced Impacts Alternative. The adjacent arterials component would require acquisition of one commercial building containing two businesses. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. In some areas, design year noise levels could increase by as much as 14 decibels over existing levels. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0468D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110038, Supplemental Draft EIS--353 pages, Appendices--247 pages, February 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 17 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-SD KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128161?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.title=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). [Part 16 of 29] T2 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). AN - 873128153; 14794-8_0016 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction of Interstate 94 (I-94) from 124th Street to 70th Street and the US Highway 45/I-894 corridor from Lincoln Avenue to Burleigh Street in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin is proposed. The study area encompasses the Zoo Interchange and its four approaches, referred to as the east, west, north, and south legs. The west terminus of the project is 124th Street, and the east terminus is 70th Street, a distance of about 3.5 miles. The south terminus is Lincoln Avenue, and the north terminus is Burleigh Street, a distance of about 5.5 miles. The scope of the project includes rebuilding the mainline roadway and bridges; modifying interchange access to improve safety and traffic flow; reconstructing POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would maintain a key link in the local, state, and national transportation network; address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system to improve safety; replace deteriorating pavement and bridges; and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way, totaling 55 to 74 acres within the study area, would need to be acquired. Acquisition of six to 31 residences would be required to implement the 6-lane Modernization Alternative, six to 32 residences would be needed for the 8-lane Modernization Alternative, and eight residences and three businesses would be needed for the Reduced Impacts Alternative. The adjacent arterials component would require acquisition of one commercial building containing two businesses. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. In some areas, design year noise levels could increase by as much as 14 decibels over existing levels. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0468D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110038, Supplemental Draft EIS--353 pages, Appendices--247 pages, February 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 16 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-SD KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128153?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.title=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). [Part 6 of 29] T2 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). AN - 873128148; 14794-8_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction of Interstate 94 (I-94) from 124th Street to 70th Street and the US Highway 45/I-894 corridor from Lincoln Avenue to Burleigh Street in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin is proposed. The study area encompasses the Zoo Interchange and its four approaches, referred to as the east, west, north, and south legs. The west terminus of the project is 124th Street, and the east terminus is 70th Street, a distance of about 3.5 miles. The south terminus is Lincoln Avenue, and the north terminus is Burleigh Street, a distance of about 5.5 miles. The scope of the project includes rebuilding the mainline roadway and bridges; modifying interchange access to improve safety and traffic flow; reconstructing POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would maintain a key link in the local, state, and national transportation network; address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system to improve safety; replace deteriorating pavement and bridges; and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way, totaling 55 to 74 acres within the study area, would need to be acquired. Acquisition of six to 31 residences would be required to implement the 6-lane Modernization Alternative, six to 32 residences would be needed for the 8-lane Modernization Alternative, and eight residences and three businesses would be needed for the Reduced Impacts Alternative. The adjacent arterials component would require acquisition of one commercial building containing two businesses. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. In some areas, design year noise levels could increase by as much as 14 decibels over existing levels. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0468D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110038, Supplemental Draft EIS--353 pages, Appendices--247 pages, February 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-SD KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128148?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.title=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). [Part 5 of 29] T2 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). AN - 873128141; 14794-8_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction of Interstate 94 (I-94) from 124th Street to 70th Street and the US Highway 45/I-894 corridor from Lincoln Avenue to Burleigh Street in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin is proposed. The study area encompasses the Zoo Interchange and its four approaches, referred to as the east, west, north, and south legs. The west terminus of the project is 124th Street, and the east terminus is 70th Street, a distance of about 3.5 miles. The south terminus is Lincoln Avenue, and the north terminus is Burleigh Street, a distance of about 5.5 miles. The scope of the project includes rebuilding the mainline roadway and bridges; modifying interchange access to improve safety and traffic flow; reconstructing POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would maintain a key link in the local, state, and national transportation network; address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system to improve safety; replace deteriorating pavement and bridges; and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way, totaling 55 to 74 acres within the study area, would need to be acquired. Acquisition of six to 31 residences would be required to implement the 6-lane Modernization Alternative, six to 32 residences would be needed for the 8-lane Modernization Alternative, and eight residences and three businesses would be needed for the Reduced Impacts Alternative. The adjacent arterials component would require acquisition of one commercial building containing two businesses. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. In some areas, design year noise levels could increase by as much as 14 decibels over existing levels. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0468D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110038, Supplemental Draft EIS--353 pages, Appendices--247 pages, February 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-SD KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128141?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.title=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). [Part 4 of 29] T2 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). AN - 873128136; 14794-8_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction of Interstate 94 (I-94) from 124th Street to 70th Street and the US Highway 45/I-894 corridor from Lincoln Avenue to Burleigh Street in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin is proposed. The study area encompasses the Zoo Interchange and its four approaches, referred to as the east, west, north, and south legs. The west terminus of the project is 124th Street, and the east terminus is 70th Street, a distance of about 3.5 miles. The south terminus is Lincoln Avenue, and the north terminus is Burleigh Street, a distance of about 5.5 miles. The scope of the project includes rebuilding the mainline roadway and bridges; modifying interchange access to improve safety and traffic flow; reconstructing POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would maintain a key link in the local, state, and national transportation network; address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system to improve safety; replace deteriorating pavement and bridges; and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way, totaling 55 to 74 acres within the study area, would need to be acquired. Acquisition of six to 31 residences would be required to implement the 6-lane Modernization Alternative, six to 32 residences would be needed for the 8-lane Modernization Alternative, and eight residences and three businesses would be needed for the Reduced Impacts Alternative. The adjacent arterials component would require acquisition of one commercial building containing two businesses. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. In some areas, design year noise levels could increase by as much as 14 decibels over existing levels. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0468D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110038, Supplemental Draft EIS--353 pages, Appendices--247 pages, February 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-SD KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128136?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.title=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND CANYON NATIONAL PARK SPECIAL FLIGHT RULES AREA, COCONINO COUNTY, ARIZONA. [Part 5 of 6] T2 - GRAND CANYON NATIONAL PARK SPECIAL FLIGHT RULES AREA, COCONINO COUNTY, ARIZONA. AN - 873128131; 14792-6_0005 AB - PURPOSE: Special flight rules for the management of overflight activity to substantially restore natural quiet in Grand Canyon National Park (GCNP), Coconino County, Arizona are proposed. GCNP, established in 1919, encompasses 1,216,000 acres of public land on the Colorado Plateaus southern end, and is a globally significant natural resource containing scenic vistas known throughout the world. More than four million recreational park visits occur yearly. The 1987 National Parks Overflights Act requires restoration of natural quiet and visitor experience in GCNP and mandates that the Secretary of the Interior submit to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) recommendations regarding actions necessary for the protection of resources in the Grand Canyon from adverse impacts associated with aircraft overflights. The National Parks Air Tour Management Act of 2000 affirmed that requirement, and required the FAA to designate reasonably achievable requirements for fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters to employ quiet-aircraft technology. It also called for the FAA, in consultation with the National Parks Service (NPS) and the Grand Canyon Working Group, to create incentive routes for commercial air-tour quiet-technology aircraft operating in GCNP, as long as the routes do not negatively impact substantial restoration of natural quiet, tribal lands, or safety. Actions since 1987 have reduced adverse effects of aircraft overflights with the current condition peak day achieving 55 percent restoration of natural quiet. However, NPS is concerned that sensitive natural and cultural resources and ground-based visitors in some park areas continue to be adversely affected by aircraft overflights. The study area is 140 miles east-west and 85 miles north-south, and encompasses GCNP as well as adjacent tribal and other federal lands. Substantial restoration of natural quiet is defined as a reduction of noise from aircraft operations at or below 17,999 feet mean sea level within the Special Flight Rules Area (SFRA) resulting in 50 percent or more of the park achieving restoration of natural quiet (i.e., no aircraft audible) for 75 percent to 100 percent of the day, each and every day. Fifty percent of the park is the minimum restoration goal. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. Under Alternative A, all aspects of current management for general aviation and air-tour operations in the SFRA would continue with no requirements or incentives to use quiet-technology aircraft. Operations would continue in the SFRAs East End from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m., May through September, and 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., October through April. There would be no limits on daily or seasonal allowable operation times in the West End and no maximum daily cap. The air-tour annual allocation would continue to be 93,971 flights. Alternative E would implement seasonal air-tour route use, maximize GCNP area in flight-free zones, and reduce hours and area available for air-tour overflights. A mix of curfews and conversion to best available quiet technology aircraft would be implemented to achieve project objectives. Alternative E would allow a daily maximum 364 total operations by air-tour and air-tour-related flights in the SFRA, and an annual maximum 93,971 flights. Alternative F minimizes changes from current practices but would include Dragon Corridor seasonal shifts, one general-aviation corridor closure, and quiet-technology incentives. Alternative F would have the same annual allocation provision of 93,971 commercial air-tour operations, but there would be no daily cap. The preferred alternative would implement rules for alternating use of Zuni Point and Dragon Corridors for short-loop tours, raising flight-free zone upper boundaries to 18,000 feet, quiet-technology incentives, modified tour routes to avoid sensitive resources, modified curfews, full conversion to quiet-technology aircraft, and moving most non-tour flights outside the SFRA. Air-tours and air-tour-related operations would have an annual allocation limit of 65,000 flights, with a daily cap of 364 air-tours. Under all alternatives, operations in support of the Hualapai Tribe would continue exempt from annual allocations and daily caps. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would restore natural quiet and experience at GCNP while maintaining compliance with FAA laws, regulations and policies regarding aviation safety and airspace management. Under the preferred alternative, a range of tours year-round, and iconic views would be available for aerial viewing from a variety of routes. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Overflights would continue to adversely affect wildlife to varying degrees in different sections of GCNP. Species affected include peregrine falcon, California condor, and Mexican spotted owl. More restrictive regulation would have long-term, minor to moderate effects on air tour operators, Native American tribes, and general aviation in the study area. LEGAL MANDATES: National Park Service Organic Act of 1916 (16 U.S.C. 1 et seq.), National Parks Air Tour Management Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-181), and National Parks Overflights Act of 1987 (P.L. 100-91). JF - EPA number: 110036, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--671 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume 2)--341 pages, February 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 5 KW - Air Transportation KW - Agency number: DES 10-60 KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Birds KW - Helicopters KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Indian Reservations KW - National Parks KW - Noise Assessments KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Regulations KW - Transportation KW - Wild and Scenic Rivers KW - Wilderness KW - Wilderness Management KW - Wildlife KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arizona KW - Grand Canyon National Park KW - National Park Service Organic Act of 1916, Compliance KW - National Parks Air Tour Management Act of 2000, Compliance KW - National Parks Overflights Act of 1987, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128131?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+CANYON+NATIONAL+PARK+SPECIAL+FLIGHT+RULES+AREA%2C+COCONINO+COUNTY%2C+ARIZONA.&rft.title=GRAND+CANYON+NATIONAL+PARK+SPECIAL+FLIGHT+RULES+AREA%2C+COCONINO+COUNTY%2C+ARIZONA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Grand Canyon, Arizona; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND CANYON NATIONAL PARK SPECIAL FLIGHT RULES AREA, COCONINO COUNTY, ARIZONA. [Part 4 of 6] T2 - GRAND CANYON NATIONAL PARK SPECIAL FLIGHT RULES AREA, COCONINO COUNTY, ARIZONA. AN - 873128122; 14792-6_0004 AB - PURPOSE: Special flight rules for the management of overflight activity to substantially restore natural quiet in Grand Canyon National Park (GCNP), Coconino County, Arizona are proposed. GCNP, established in 1919, encompasses 1,216,000 acres of public land on the Colorado Plateaus southern end, and is a globally significant natural resource containing scenic vistas known throughout the world. More than four million recreational park visits occur yearly. The 1987 National Parks Overflights Act requires restoration of natural quiet and visitor experience in GCNP and mandates that the Secretary of the Interior submit to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) recommendations regarding actions necessary for the protection of resources in the Grand Canyon from adverse impacts associated with aircraft overflights. The National Parks Air Tour Management Act of 2000 affirmed that requirement, and required the FAA to designate reasonably achievable requirements for fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters to employ quiet-aircraft technology. It also called for the FAA, in consultation with the National Parks Service (NPS) and the Grand Canyon Working Group, to create incentive routes for commercial air-tour quiet-technology aircraft operating in GCNP, as long as the routes do not negatively impact substantial restoration of natural quiet, tribal lands, or safety. Actions since 1987 have reduced adverse effects of aircraft overflights with the current condition peak day achieving 55 percent restoration of natural quiet. However, NPS is concerned that sensitive natural and cultural resources and ground-based visitors in some park areas continue to be adversely affected by aircraft overflights. The study area is 140 miles east-west and 85 miles north-south, and encompasses GCNP as well as adjacent tribal and other federal lands. Substantial restoration of natural quiet is defined as a reduction of noise from aircraft operations at or below 17,999 feet mean sea level within the Special Flight Rules Area (SFRA) resulting in 50 percent or more of the park achieving restoration of natural quiet (i.e., no aircraft audible) for 75 percent to 100 percent of the day, each and every day. Fifty percent of the park is the minimum restoration goal. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. Under Alternative A, all aspects of current management for general aviation and air-tour operations in the SFRA would continue with no requirements or incentives to use quiet-technology aircraft. Operations would continue in the SFRAs East End from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m., May through September, and 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., October through April. There would be no limits on daily or seasonal allowable operation times in the West End and no maximum daily cap. The air-tour annual allocation would continue to be 93,971 flights. Alternative E would implement seasonal air-tour route use, maximize GCNP area in flight-free zones, and reduce hours and area available for air-tour overflights. A mix of curfews and conversion to best available quiet technology aircraft would be implemented to achieve project objectives. Alternative E would allow a daily maximum 364 total operations by air-tour and air-tour-related flights in the SFRA, and an annual maximum 93,971 flights. Alternative F minimizes changes from current practices but would include Dragon Corridor seasonal shifts, one general-aviation corridor closure, and quiet-technology incentives. Alternative F would have the same annual allocation provision of 93,971 commercial air-tour operations, but there would be no daily cap. The preferred alternative would implement rules for alternating use of Zuni Point and Dragon Corridors for short-loop tours, raising flight-free zone upper boundaries to 18,000 feet, quiet-technology incentives, modified tour routes to avoid sensitive resources, modified curfews, full conversion to quiet-technology aircraft, and moving most non-tour flights outside the SFRA. Air-tours and air-tour-related operations would have an annual allocation limit of 65,000 flights, with a daily cap of 364 air-tours. Under all alternatives, operations in support of the Hualapai Tribe would continue exempt from annual allocations and daily caps. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would restore natural quiet and experience at GCNP while maintaining compliance with FAA laws, regulations and policies regarding aviation safety and airspace management. Under the preferred alternative, a range of tours year-round, and iconic views would be available for aerial viewing from a variety of routes. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Overflights would continue to adversely affect wildlife to varying degrees in different sections of GCNP. Species affected include peregrine falcon, California condor, and Mexican spotted owl. More restrictive regulation would have long-term, minor to moderate effects on air tour operators, Native American tribes, and general aviation in the study area. LEGAL MANDATES: National Park Service Organic Act of 1916 (16 U.S.C. 1 et seq.), National Parks Air Tour Management Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-181), and National Parks Overflights Act of 1987 (P.L. 100-91). JF - EPA number: 110036, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--671 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume 2)--341 pages, February 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 4 KW - Air Transportation KW - Agency number: DES 10-60 KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Birds KW - Helicopters KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Indian Reservations KW - National Parks KW - Noise Assessments KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Regulations KW - Transportation KW - Wild and Scenic Rivers KW - Wilderness KW - Wilderness Management KW - Wildlife KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arizona KW - Grand Canyon National Park KW - National Park Service Organic Act of 1916, Compliance KW - National Parks Air Tour Management Act of 2000, Compliance KW - National Parks Overflights Act of 1987, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128122?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+CANYON+NATIONAL+PARK+SPECIAL+FLIGHT+RULES+AREA%2C+COCONINO+COUNTY%2C+ARIZONA.&rft.title=GRAND+CANYON+NATIONAL+PARK+SPECIAL+FLIGHT+RULES+AREA%2C+COCONINO+COUNTY%2C+ARIZONA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Grand Canyon, Arizona; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). [Part 24 of 29] T2 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). AN - 873127554; 14794-8_0024 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction of Interstate 94 (I-94) from 124th Street to 70th Street and the US Highway 45/I-894 corridor from Lincoln Avenue to Burleigh Street in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin is proposed. The study area encompasses the Zoo Interchange and its four approaches, referred to as the east, west, north, and south legs. The west terminus of the project is 124th Street, and the east terminus is 70th Street, a distance of about 3.5 miles. The south terminus is Lincoln Avenue, and the north terminus is Burleigh Street, a distance of about 5.5 miles. The scope of the project includes rebuilding the mainline roadway and bridges; modifying interchange access to improve safety and traffic flow; reconstructing POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would maintain a key link in the local, state, and national transportation network; address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system to improve safety; replace deteriorating pavement and bridges; and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way, totaling 55 to 74 acres within the study area, would need to be acquired. Acquisition of six to 31 residences would be required to implement the 6-lane Modernization Alternative, six to 32 residences would be needed for the 8-lane Modernization Alternative, and eight residences and three businesses would be needed for the Reduced Impacts Alternative. The adjacent arterials component would require acquisition of one commercial building containing two businesses. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. In some areas, design year noise levels could increase by as much as 14 decibels over existing levels. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0468D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110038, Supplemental Draft EIS--353 pages, Appendices--247 pages, February 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 24 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-SD KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127554?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.title=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). [Part 23 of 29] T2 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). AN - 873127549; 14794-8_0023 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction of Interstate 94 (I-94) from 124th Street to 70th Street and the US Highway 45/I-894 corridor from Lincoln Avenue to Burleigh Street in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin is proposed. The study area encompasses the Zoo Interchange and its four approaches, referred to as the east, west, north, and south legs. The west terminus of the project is 124th Street, and the east terminus is 70th Street, a distance of about 3.5 miles. The south terminus is Lincoln Avenue, and the north terminus is Burleigh Street, a distance of about 5.5 miles. The scope of the project includes rebuilding the mainline roadway and bridges; modifying interchange access to improve safety and traffic flow; reconstructing POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would maintain a key link in the local, state, and national transportation network; address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system to improve safety; replace deteriorating pavement and bridges; and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way, totaling 55 to 74 acres within the study area, would need to be acquired. Acquisition of six to 31 residences would be required to implement the 6-lane Modernization Alternative, six to 32 residences would be needed for the 8-lane Modernization Alternative, and eight residences and three businesses would be needed for the Reduced Impacts Alternative. The adjacent arterials component would require acquisition of one commercial building containing two businesses. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. In some areas, design year noise levels could increase by as much as 14 decibels over existing levels. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0468D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110038, Supplemental Draft EIS--353 pages, Appendices--247 pages, February 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 23 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-SD KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127549?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.title=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). [Part 22 of 29] T2 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). AN - 873127545; 14794-8_0022 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction of Interstate 94 (I-94) from 124th Street to 70th Street and the US Highway 45/I-894 corridor from Lincoln Avenue to Burleigh Street in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin is proposed. The study area encompasses the Zoo Interchange and its four approaches, referred to as the east, west, north, and south legs. The west terminus of the project is 124th Street, and the east terminus is 70th Street, a distance of about 3.5 miles. The south terminus is Lincoln Avenue, and the north terminus is Burleigh Street, a distance of about 5.5 miles. The scope of the project includes rebuilding the mainline roadway and bridges; modifying interchange access to improve safety and traffic flow; reconstructing POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would maintain a key link in the local, state, and national transportation network; address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system to improve safety; replace deteriorating pavement and bridges; and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way, totaling 55 to 74 acres within the study area, would need to be acquired. Acquisition of six to 31 residences would be required to implement the 6-lane Modernization Alternative, six to 32 residences would be needed for the 8-lane Modernization Alternative, and eight residences and three businesses would be needed for the Reduced Impacts Alternative. The adjacent arterials component would require acquisition of one commercial building containing two businesses. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. In some areas, design year noise levels could increase by as much as 14 decibels over existing levels. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0468D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110038, Supplemental Draft EIS--353 pages, Appendices--247 pages, February 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 22 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-SD KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127545?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.title=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). [Part 21 of 29] T2 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). AN - 873127541; 14794-8_0021 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction of Interstate 94 (I-94) from 124th Street to 70th Street and the US Highway 45/I-894 corridor from Lincoln Avenue to Burleigh Street in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin is proposed. The study area encompasses the Zoo Interchange and its four approaches, referred to as the east, west, north, and south legs. The west terminus of the project is 124th Street, and the east terminus is 70th Street, a distance of about 3.5 miles. The south terminus is Lincoln Avenue, and the north terminus is Burleigh Street, a distance of about 5.5 miles. The scope of the project includes rebuilding the mainline roadway and bridges; modifying interchange access to improve safety and traffic flow; reconstructing POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would maintain a key link in the local, state, and national transportation network; address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system to improve safety; replace deteriorating pavement and bridges; and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way, totaling 55 to 74 acres within the study area, would need to be acquired. Acquisition of six to 31 residences would be required to implement the 6-lane Modernization Alternative, six to 32 residences would be needed for the 8-lane Modernization Alternative, and eight residences and three businesses would be needed for the Reduced Impacts Alternative. The adjacent arterials component would require acquisition of one commercial building containing two businesses. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. In some areas, design year noise levels could increase by as much as 14 decibels over existing levels. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0468D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110038, Supplemental Draft EIS--353 pages, Appendices--247 pages, February 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 21 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-SD KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127541?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.title=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). [Part 20 of 29] T2 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). AN - 873127531; 14794-8_0020 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction of Interstate 94 (I-94) from 124th Street to 70th Street and the US Highway 45/I-894 corridor from Lincoln Avenue to Burleigh Street in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin is proposed. The study area encompasses the Zoo Interchange and its four approaches, referred to as the east, west, north, and south legs. The west terminus of the project is 124th Street, and the east terminus is 70th Street, a distance of about 3.5 miles. The south terminus is Lincoln Avenue, and the north terminus is Burleigh Street, a distance of about 5.5 miles. The scope of the project includes rebuilding the mainline roadway and bridges; modifying interchange access to improve safety and traffic flow; reconstructing POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would maintain a key link in the local, state, and national transportation network; address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system to improve safety; replace deteriorating pavement and bridges; and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way, totaling 55 to 74 acres within the study area, would need to be acquired. Acquisition of six to 31 residences would be required to implement the 6-lane Modernization Alternative, six to 32 residences would be needed for the 8-lane Modernization Alternative, and eight residences and three businesses would be needed for the Reduced Impacts Alternative. The adjacent arterials component would require acquisition of one commercial building containing two businesses. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. In some areas, design year noise levels could increase by as much as 14 decibels over existing levels. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0468D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110038, Supplemental Draft EIS--353 pages, Appendices--247 pages, February 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 20 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-SD KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127531?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.title=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). [Part 2 of 29] T2 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). AN - 873127522; 14794-8_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction of Interstate 94 (I-94) from 124th Street to 70th Street and the US Highway 45/I-894 corridor from Lincoln Avenue to Burleigh Street in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin is proposed. The study area encompasses the Zoo Interchange and its four approaches, referred to as the east, west, north, and south legs. The west terminus of the project is 124th Street, and the east terminus is 70th Street, a distance of about 3.5 miles. The south terminus is Lincoln Avenue, and the north terminus is Burleigh Street, a distance of about 5.5 miles. The scope of the project includes rebuilding the mainline roadway and bridges; modifying interchange access to improve safety and traffic flow; reconstructing POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would maintain a key link in the local, state, and national transportation network; address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system to improve safety; replace deteriorating pavement and bridges; and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way, totaling 55 to 74 acres within the study area, would need to be acquired. Acquisition of six to 31 residences would be required to implement the 6-lane Modernization Alternative, six to 32 residences would be needed for the 8-lane Modernization Alternative, and eight residences and three businesses would be needed for the Reduced Impacts Alternative. The adjacent arterials component would require acquisition of one commercial building containing two businesses. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. In some areas, design year noise levels could increase by as much as 14 decibels over existing levels. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0468D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110038, Supplemental Draft EIS--353 pages, Appendices--247 pages, February 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-SD KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127522?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.title=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). [Part 1 of 29] T2 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). AN - 873127516; 14794-8_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction of Interstate 94 (I-94) from 124th Street to 70th Street and the US Highway 45/I-894 corridor from Lincoln Avenue to Burleigh Street in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin is proposed. The study area encompasses the Zoo Interchange and its four approaches, referred to as the east, west, north, and south legs. The west terminus of the project is 124th Street, and the east terminus is 70th Street, a distance of about 3.5 miles. The south terminus is Lincoln Avenue, and the north terminus is Burleigh Street, a distance of about 5.5 miles. The scope of the project includes rebuilding the mainline roadway and bridges; modifying interchange access to improve safety and traffic flow; reconstructing POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would maintain a key link in the local, state, and national transportation network; address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system to improve safety; replace deteriorating pavement and bridges; and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way, totaling 55 to 74 acres within the study area, would need to be acquired. Acquisition of six to 31 residences would be required to implement the 6-lane Modernization Alternative, six to 32 residences would be needed for the 8-lane Modernization Alternative, and eight residences and three businesses would be needed for the Reduced Impacts Alternative. The adjacent arterials component would require acquisition of one commercial building containing two businesses. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. In some areas, design year noise levels could increase by as much as 14 decibels over existing levels. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0468D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110038, Supplemental Draft EIS--353 pages, Appendices--247 pages, February 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-SD KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127516?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.title=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND CANYON NATIONAL PARK SPECIAL FLIGHT RULES AREA, COCONINO COUNTY, ARIZONA. [Part 6 of 6] T2 - GRAND CANYON NATIONAL PARK SPECIAL FLIGHT RULES AREA, COCONINO COUNTY, ARIZONA. AN - 873127475; 14792-6_0006 AB - PURPOSE: Special flight rules for the management of overflight activity to substantially restore natural quiet in Grand Canyon National Park (GCNP), Coconino County, Arizona are proposed. GCNP, established in 1919, encompasses 1,216,000 acres of public land on the Colorado Plateaus southern end, and is a globally significant natural resource containing scenic vistas known throughout the world. More than four million recreational park visits occur yearly. The 1987 National Parks Overflights Act requires restoration of natural quiet and visitor experience in GCNP and mandates that the Secretary of the Interior submit to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) recommendations regarding actions necessary for the protection of resources in the Grand Canyon from adverse impacts associated with aircraft overflights. The National Parks Air Tour Management Act of 2000 affirmed that requirement, and required the FAA to designate reasonably achievable requirements for fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters to employ quiet-aircraft technology. It also called for the FAA, in consultation with the National Parks Service (NPS) and the Grand Canyon Working Group, to create incentive routes for commercial air-tour quiet-technology aircraft operating in GCNP, as long as the routes do not negatively impact substantial restoration of natural quiet, tribal lands, or safety. Actions since 1987 have reduced adverse effects of aircraft overflights with the current condition peak day achieving 55 percent restoration of natural quiet. However, NPS is concerned that sensitive natural and cultural resources and ground-based visitors in some park areas continue to be adversely affected by aircraft overflights. The study area is 140 miles east-west and 85 miles north-south, and encompasses GCNP as well as adjacent tribal and other federal lands. Substantial restoration of natural quiet is defined as a reduction of noise from aircraft operations at or below 17,999 feet mean sea level within the Special Flight Rules Area (SFRA) resulting in 50 percent or more of the park achieving restoration of natural quiet (i.e., no aircraft audible) for 75 percent to 100 percent of the day, each and every day. Fifty percent of the park is the minimum restoration goal. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. Under Alternative A, all aspects of current management for general aviation and air-tour operations in the SFRA would continue with no requirements or incentives to use quiet-technology aircraft. Operations would continue in the SFRAs East End from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m., May through September, and 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., October through April. There would be no limits on daily or seasonal allowable operation times in the West End and no maximum daily cap. The air-tour annual allocation would continue to be 93,971 flights. Alternative E would implement seasonal air-tour route use, maximize GCNP area in flight-free zones, and reduce hours and area available for air-tour overflights. A mix of curfews and conversion to best available quiet technology aircraft would be implemented to achieve project objectives. Alternative E would allow a daily maximum 364 total operations by air-tour and air-tour-related flights in the SFRA, and an annual maximum 93,971 flights. Alternative F minimizes changes from current practices but would include Dragon Corridor seasonal shifts, one general-aviation corridor closure, and quiet-technology incentives. Alternative F would have the same annual allocation provision of 93,971 commercial air-tour operations, but there would be no daily cap. The preferred alternative would implement rules for alternating use of Zuni Point and Dragon Corridors for short-loop tours, raising flight-free zone upper boundaries to 18,000 feet, quiet-technology incentives, modified tour routes to avoid sensitive resources, modified curfews, full conversion to quiet-technology aircraft, and moving most non-tour flights outside the SFRA. Air-tours and air-tour-related operations would have an annual allocation limit of 65,000 flights, with a daily cap of 364 air-tours. Under all alternatives, operations in support of the Hualapai Tribe would continue exempt from annual allocations and daily caps. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would restore natural quiet and experience at GCNP while maintaining compliance with FAA laws, regulations and policies regarding aviation safety and airspace management. Under the preferred alternative, a range of tours year-round, and iconic views would be available for aerial viewing from a variety of routes. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Overflights would continue to adversely affect wildlife to varying degrees in different sections of GCNP. Species affected include peregrine falcon, California condor, and Mexican spotted owl. More restrictive regulation would have long-term, minor to moderate effects on air tour operators, Native American tribes, and general aviation in the study area. LEGAL MANDATES: National Park Service Organic Act of 1916 (16 U.S.C. 1 et seq.), National Parks Air Tour Management Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-181), and National Parks Overflights Act of 1987 (P.L. 100-91). JF - EPA number: 110036, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--671 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume 2)--341 pages, February 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 6 KW - Air Transportation KW - Agency number: DES 10-60 KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Birds KW - Helicopters KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Indian Reservations KW - National Parks KW - Noise Assessments KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Regulations KW - Transportation KW - Wild and Scenic Rivers KW - Wilderness KW - Wilderness Management KW - Wildlife KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arizona KW - Grand Canyon National Park KW - National Park Service Organic Act of 1916, Compliance KW - National Parks Air Tour Management Act of 2000, Compliance KW - National Parks Overflights Act of 1987, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127475?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+CANYON+NATIONAL+PARK+SPECIAL+FLIGHT+RULES+AREA%2C+COCONINO+COUNTY%2C+ARIZONA.&rft.title=GRAND+CANYON+NATIONAL+PARK+SPECIAL+FLIGHT+RULES+AREA%2C+COCONINO+COUNTY%2C+ARIZONA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Grand Canyon, Arizona; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - IDAHO 16, I-84 TO IDAHO 44 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY, ADA AND CANYON COUNTIES, IDAHO. [Part 1 of 2] T2 - IDAHO 16, I-84 TO IDAHO 44 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY, ADA AND CANYON COUNTIES, IDAHO. AN - 873127418; 14796-0_0001 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new limited-access divided highway route, the Idaho16 extension, connecting Interstate 84 (I-84) to Idaho 44 (State Street), Ada and Canyon counties, Idaho is proposed. Ada and Canyon counties, comprising the Treasure Valley, are growing in terms of population, employment, and housing. Between 1980 and mid-2007, the population of the two counties increased 115 percent. Proposed planned communities and rapid development in the communities of Emmett, Eagle, Star, Nampa, and Meridian are increasing travel demand on Idaho highways and surrounding regional roadways. Current north-south routes connecting I-84 to Idaho 44 are not adequate to meet the future travel demands of the Treasure Valley. Screening determined that the Idaho 16 extension, which includes a new roadway crossing of the Boise River, was the only one of five initial transportation concepts that would meet the area's transportation needs. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to costs, safety, noise, and impacts to the Boise River. Six build alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this final EIS. Under Alternative 2D, which is the preferred alternative, a four-lane divided highway would be constructed beginning at I-84 and traversing north through the project study area west of the existing McDermott Road. The extension would cross the Boise River, intersect Idaho 44, and terminate 0.81 miles north of Idaho 44 at existing Idaho 16 for an overall length of 7.45 miles. Facilities would include interchanges at Franklin Road, Ustick Road, and US 20/26 (Chinden Boulevard), and grade-separated crossings (overpasses) at the Union Pacific Railroad, Cherry Lane, and McMillan Road. A 300-foot-wide corridor would provide flexibility for future multimodal operations and travel lane capacity. A 220-foot-wide corridor through the Boise River crossing area corridor would provide width to accommodate the roadway, storm drainage basins, roadside safety features, and utilities. The estimated cost of the preferred alternative is $490 million and phased construction would be required for completion. Phase 1 would consist of a two-mile, four-lane divided highway connecting Idaho 16 from US 20/26 across the Boise River to Idaho 44. Phase 2 would include constructing the new highway from I-84 to US 20/26, completing all interchanges and overpasses and associated local roadways. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would increase the transportation capacity of the Idaho state highway system within western Ada and eastern Canyon counties and reduce north-south travel times between I-84 and destinations north of the Boise River in the vicinity of the Idaho 16 and Idaho 44 intersection by an estimated 50 percent. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way would require acquisition of 168 full and partial parcels comprising 682 acres and would entail displacement of 48 residential properties, one farm, and two home-based commercial enterprises. Embankments would result in floodplain encroachments at the Boise River, Five Mile Creek, and Ten Mile Creek. Impacts to wetlands would total 6.8 acres with the majority to marsh and forested wetlands. Approximately 25.8 acres of native habitat and an additional 0.7 acres of aquatic habitat would be lost. Nine properties eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places would be adversely affected. Fifty residences would be adversely affected by noise from the proposed roadway. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0304D, Volume 33, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 110040, Final EIS--638 pages and maps, Appendices--608 pages, February 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-ID-EIS-09-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Creeks KW - Easements KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Boise River KW - Idaho KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127418?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=IDAHO+16%2C+I-84+TO+IDAHO+44+ENVIRONMENTAL+STUDY%2C+ADA+AND+CANYON+COUNTIES%2C+IDAHO.&rft.title=IDAHO+16%2C+I-84+TO+IDAHO+44+ENVIRONMENTAL+STUDY%2C+ADA+AND+CANYON+COUNTIES%2C+IDAHO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Boise, Idaho; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: February 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). [Part 27 of 29] T2 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). AN - 873127189; 14794-8_0027 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction of Interstate 94 (I-94) from 124th Street to 70th Street and the US Highway 45/I-894 corridor from Lincoln Avenue to Burleigh Street in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin is proposed. The study area encompasses the Zoo Interchange and its four approaches, referred to as the east, west, north, and south legs. The west terminus of the project is 124th Street, and the east terminus is 70th Street, a distance of about 3.5 miles. The south terminus is Lincoln Avenue, and the north terminus is Burleigh Street, a distance of about 5.5 miles. The scope of the project includes rebuilding the mainline roadway and bridges; modifying interchange access to improve safety and traffic flow; reconstructing POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would maintain a key link in the local, state, and national transportation network; address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system to improve safety; replace deteriorating pavement and bridges; and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way, totaling 55 to 74 acres within the study area, would need to be acquired. Acquisition of six to 31 residences would be required to implement the 6-lane Modernization Alternative, six to 32 residences would be needed for the 8-lane Modernization Alternative, and eight residences and three businesses would be needed for the Reduced Impacts Alternative. The adjacent arterials component would require acquisition of one commercial building containing two businesses. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. In some areas, design year noise levels could increase by as much as 14 decibels over existing levels. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0468D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110038, Supplemental Draft EIS--353 pages, Appendices--247 pages, February 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 27 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-SD KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127189?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.title=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). [Part 26 of 29] T2 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). AN - 873127185; 14794-8_0026 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction of Interstate 94 (I-94) from 124th Street to 70th Street and the US Highway 45/I-894 corridor from Lincoln Avenue to Burleigh Street in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin is proposed. The study area encompasses the Zoo Interchange and its four approaches, referred to as the east, west, north, and south legs. The west terminus of the project is 124th Street, and the east terminus is 70th Street, a distance of about 3.5 miles. The south terminus is Lincoln Avenue, and the north terminus is Burleigh Street, a distance of about 5.5 miles. The scope of the project includes rebuilding the mainline roadway and bridges; modifying interchange access to improve safety and traffic flow; reconstructing POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would maintain a key link in the local, state, and national transportation network; address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system to improve safety; replace deteriorating pavement and bridges; and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way, totaling 55 to 74 acres within the study area, would need to be acquired. Acquisition of six to 31 residences would be required to implement the 6-lane Modernization Alternative, six to 32 residences would be needed for the 8-lane Modernization Alternative, and eight residences and three businesses would be needed for the Reduced Impacts Alternative. The adjacent arterials component would require acquisition of one commercial building containing two businesses. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. In some areas, design year noise levels could increase by as much as 14 decibels over existing levels. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0468D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110038, Supplemental Draft EIS--353 pages, Appendices--247 pages, February 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 26 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-SD KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127185?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.title=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). [Part 25 of 29] T2 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). AN - 873127183; 14794-8_0025 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction of Interstate 94 (I-94) from 124th Street to 70th Street and the US Highway 45/I-894 corridor from Lincoln Avenue to Burleigh Street in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin is proposed. The study area encompasses the Zoo Interchange and its four approaches, referred to as the east, west, north, and south legs. The west terminus of the project is 124th Street, and the east terminus is 70th Street, a distance of about 3.5 miles. The south terminus is Lincoln Avenue, and the north terminus is Burleigh Street, a distance of about 5.5 miles. The scope of the project includes rebuilding the mainline roadway and bridges; modifying interchange access to improve safety and traffic flow; reconstructing POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would maintain a key link in the local, state, and national transportation network; address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system to improve safety; replace deteriorating pavement and bridges; and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way, totaling 55 to 74 acres within the study area, would need to be acquired. Acquisition of six to 31 residences would be required to implement the 6-lane Modernization Alternative, six to 32 residences would be needed for the 8-lane Modernization Alternative, and eight residences and three businesses would be needed for the Reduced Impacts Alternative. The adjacent arterials component would require acquisition of one commercial building containing two businesses. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. In some areas, design year noise levels could increase by as much as 14 decibels over existing levels. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0468D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110038, Supplemental Draft EIS--353 pages, Appendices--247 pages, February 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 25 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-SD KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127183?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.title=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - IDAHO 16, I-84 TO IDAHO 44 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY, ADA AND CANYON COUNTIES, IDAHO. [Part 2 of 2] T2 - IDAHO 16, I-84 TO IDAHO 44 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY, ADA AND CANYON COUNTIES, IDAHO. AN - 873126855; 14796-0_0002 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new limited-access divided highway route, the Idaho16 extension, connecting Interstate 84 (I-84) to Idaho 44 (State Street), Ada and Canyon counties, Idaho is proposed. Ada and Canyon counties, comprising the Treasure Valley, are growing in terms of population, employment, and housing. Between 1980 and mid-2007, the population of the two counties increased 115 percent. Proposed planned communities and rapid development in the communities of Emmett, Eagle, Star, Nampa, and Meridian are increasing travel demand on Idaho highways and surrounding regional roadways. Current north-south routes connecting I-84 to Idaho 44 are not adequate to meet the future travel demands of the Treasure Valley. Screening determined that the Idaho 16 extension, which includes a new roadway crossing of the Boise River, was the only one of five initial transportation concepts that would meet the area's transportation needs. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to costs, safety, noise, and impacts to the Boise River. Six build alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this final EIS. Under Alternative 2D, which is the preferred alternative, a four-lane divided highway would be constructed beginning at I-84 and traversing north through the project study area west of the existing McDermott Road. The extension would cross the Boise River, intersect Idaho 44, and terminate 0.81 miles north of Idaho 44 at existing Idaho 16 for an overall length of 7.45 miles. Facilities would include interchanges at Franklin Road, Ustick Road, and US 20/26 (Chinden Boulevard), and grade-separated crossings (overpasses) at the Union Pacific Railroad, Cherry Lane, and McMillan Road. A 300-foot-wide corridor would provide flexibility for future multimodal operations and travel lane capacity. A 220-foot-wide corridor through the Boise River crossing area corridor would provide width to accommodate the roadway, storm drainage basins, roadside safety features, and utilities. The estimated cost of the preferred alternative is $490 million and phased construction would be required for completion. Phase 1 would consist of a two-mile, four-lane divided highway connecting Idaho 16 from US 20/26 across the Boise River to Idaho 44. Phase 2 would include constructing the new highway from I-84 to US 20/26, completing all interchanges and overpasses and associated local roadways. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would increase the transportation capacity of the Idaho state highway system within western Ada and eastern Canyon counties and reduce north-south travel times between I-84 and destinations north of the Boise River in the vicinity of the Idaho 16 and Idaho 44 intersection by an estimated 50 percent. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way would require acquisition of 168 full and partial parcels comprising 682 acres and would entail displacement of 48 residential properties, one farm, and two home-based commercial enterprises. Embankments would result in floodplain encroachments at the Boise River, Five Mile Creek, and Ten Mile Creek. Impacts to wetlands would total 6.8 acres with the majority to marsh and forested wetlands. Approximately 25.8 acres of native habitat and an additional 0.7 acres of aquatic habitat would be lost. Nine properties eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places would be adversely affected. Fifty residences would be adversely affected by noise from the proposed roadway. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0304D, Volume 33, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 110040, Final EIS--638 pages and maps, Appendices--608 pages, February 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-ID-EIS-09-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Creeks KW - Easements KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Boise River KW - Idaho KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126855?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=IDAHO+16%2C+I-84+TO+IDAHO+44+ENVIRONMENTAL+STUDY%2C+ADA+AND+CANYON+COUNTIES%2C+IDAHO.&rft.title=IDAHO+16%2C+I-84+TO+IDAHO+44+ENVIRONMENTAL+STUDY%2C+ADA+AND+CANYON+COUNTIES%2C+IDAHO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Boise, Idaho; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: February 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ZOO INTERCHANGE CORRIDOR STUDY, INTERSTATE 94 (I-94) FROM 70TH STREET TO 124TH STREET AND ON US 45 FROM BURLEIGH STREET TO I-894/US 45 AND LINCOLN AVENUE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2009). AN - 858113280; 14794 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction of Interstate 94 (I-94) from 124th Street to 70th Street and the US Highway 45/I-894 corridor from Lincoln Avenue to Burleigh Street in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin is proposed. The study area encompasses the Zoo Interchange and its four approaches, referred to as the east, west, north, and south legs. The west terminus of the project is 124th Street, and the east terminus is 70th Street, a distance of about 3.5 miles. The south terminus is Lincoln Avenue, and the north terminus is Burleigh Street, a distance of about 5.5 miles. The scope of the project includes rebuilding the mainline roadway and bridges; modifying interchange access to improve safety and traffic flow; reconstructing POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would maintain a key link in the local, state, and national transportation network; address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system to improve safety; replace deteriorating pavement and bridges; and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way, totaling 55 to 74 acres within the study area, would need to be acquired. Acquisition of six to 31 residences would be required to implement the 6-lane Modernization Alternative, six to 32 residences would be needed for the 8-lane Modernization Alternative, and eight residences and three businesses would be needed for the Reduced Impacts Alternative. The adjacent arterials component would require acquisition of one commercial building containing two businesses. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. In some areas, design year noise levels could increase by as much as 14 decibels over existing levels. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0468D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110038, Supplemental Draft EIS--353 pages, Appendices--247 pages, February 18, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-SD KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/858113280?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.title=ZOO+INTERCHANGE+CORRIDOR+STUDY%2C+INTERSTATE+94+%28I-94%29+FROM+70TH+STREET+TO+124TH+STREET+AND+ON+US+45+FROM+BURLEIGH+STREET+TO+I-894%2FUS+45+AND+LINCOLN+AVENUE%2C+MILWAUKEE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - IDAHO 16, I-84 TO IDAHO 44 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY, ADA AND CANYON COUNTIES, IDAHO. AN - 858113266; 14796 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new limited-access divided highway route, the Idaho16 extension, connecting Interstate 84 (I-84) to Idaho 44 (State Street), Ada and Canyon counties, Idaho is proposed. Ada and Canyon counties, comprising the Treasure Valley, are growing in terms of population, employment, and housing. Between 1980 and mid-2007, the population of the two counties increased 115 percent. Proposed planned communities and rapid development in the communities of Emmett, Eagle, Star, Nampa, and Meridian are increasing travel demand on Idaho highways and surrounding regional roadways. Current north-south routes connecting I-84 to Idaho 44 are not adequate to meet the future travel demands of the Treasure Valley. Screening determined that the Idaho 16 extension, which includes a new roadway crossing of the Boise River, was the only one of five initial transportation concepts that would meet the area's transportation needs. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to costs, safety, noise, and impacts to the Boise River. Six build alternatives and a No Action Alternative are evaluated in this final EIS. Under Alternative 2D, which is the preferred alternative, a four-lane divided highway would be constructed beginning at I-84 and traversing north through the project study area west of the existing McDermott Road. The extension would cross the Boise River, intersect Idaho 44, and terminate 0.81 miles north of Idaho 44 at existing Idaho 16 for an overall length of 7.45 miles. Facilities would include interchanges at Franklin Road, Ustick Road, and US 20/26 (Chinden Boulevard), and grade-separated crossings (overpasses) at the Union Pacific Railroad, Cherry Lane, and McMillan Road. A 300-foot-wide corridor would provide flexibility for future multimodal operations and travel lane capacity. A 220-foot-wide corridor through the Boise River crossing area corridor would provide width to accommodate the roadway, storm drainage basins, roadside safety features, and utilities. The estimated cost of the preferred alternative is $490 million and phased construction would be required for completion. Phase 1 would consist of a two-mile, four-lane divided highway connecting Idaho 16 from US 20/26 across the Boise River to Idaho 44. Phase 2 would include constructing the new highway from I-84 to US 20/26, completing all interchanges and overpasses and associated local roadways. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would increase the transportation capacity of the Idaho state highway system within western Ada and eastern Canyon counties and reduce north-south travel times between I-84 and destinations north of the Boise River in the vicinity of the Idaho 16 and Idaho 44 intersection by an estimated 50 percent. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way would require acquisition of 168 full and partial parcels comprising 682 acres and would entail displacement of 48 residential properties, one farm, and two home-based commercial enterprises. Embankments would result in floodplain encroachments at the Boise River, Five Mile Creek, and Ten Mile Creek. Impacts to wetlands would total 6.8 acres with the majority to marsh and forested wetlands. Approximately 25.8 acres of native habitat and an additional 0.7 acres of aquatic habitat would be lost. Nine properties eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places would be adversely affected. Fifty residences would be adversely affected by noise from the proposed roadway. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0304D, Volume 33, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 110040, Final EIS--638 pages and maps, Appendices--608 pages, February 18, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-ID-EIS-09-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Creeks KW - Easements KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Boise River KW - Idaho KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/858113266?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=IDAHO+16%2C+I-84+TO+IDAHO+44+ENVIRONMENTAL+STUDY%2C+ADA+AND+CANYON+COUNTIES%2C+IDAHO.&rft.title=IDAHO+16%2C+I-84+TO+IDAHO+44+ENVIRONMENTAL+STUDY%2C+ADA+AND+CANYON+COUNTIES%2C+IDAHO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Boise, Idaho; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: February 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND CANYON NATIONAL PARK SPECIAL FLIGHT RULES AREA, COCONINO COUNTY, ARIZONA. AN - 16385406; 14792 AB - PURPOSE: Special flight rules for the management of overflight activity to substantially restore natural quiet in Grand Canyon National Park (GCNP), Coconino County, Arizona are proposed. GCNP, established in 1919, encompasses 1,216,000 acres of public land on the Colorado Plateaus southern end, and is a globally significant natural resource containing scenic vistas known throughout the world. More than four million recreational park visits occur yearly. The 1987 National Parks Overflights Act requires restoration of natural quiet and visitor experience in GCNP and mandates that the Secretary of the Interior submit to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) recommendations regarding actions necessary for the protection of resources in the Grand Canyon from adverse impacts associated with aircraft overflights. The National Parks Air Tour Management Act of 2000 affirmed that requirement, and required the FAA to designate reasonably achievable requirements for fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters to employ quiet-aircraft technology. It also called for the FAA, in consultation with the National Parks Service (NPS) and the Grand Canyon Working Group, to create incentive routes for commercial air-tour quiet-technology aircraft operating in GCNP, as long as the routes do not negatively impact substantial restoration of natural quiet, tribal lands, or safety. Actions since 1987 have reduced adverse effects of aircraft overflights with the current condition peak day achieving 55 percent restoration of natural quiet. However, NPS is concerned that sensitive natural and cultural resources and ground-based visitors in some park areas continue to be adversely affected by aircraft overflights. The study area is 140 miles east-west and 85 miles north-south, and encompasses GCNP as well as adjacent tribal and other federal lands. Substantial restoration of natural quiet is defined as a reduction of noise from aircraft operations at or below 17,999 feet mean sea level within the Special Flight Rules Area (SFRA) resulting in 50 percent or more of the park achieving restoration of natural quiet (i.e., no aircraft audible) for 75 percent to 100 percent of the day, each and every day. Fifty percent of the park is the minimum restoration goal. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. Under Alternative A, all aspects of current management for general aviation and air-tour operations in the SFRA would continue with no requirements or incentives to use quiet-technology aircraft. Operations would continue in the SFRAs East End from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m., May through September, and 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., October through April. There would be no limits on daily or seasonal allowable operation times in the West End and no maximum daily cap. The air-tour annual allocation would continue to be 93,971 flights. Alternative E would implement seasonal air-tour route use, maximize GCNP area in flight-free zones, and reduce hours and area available for air-tour overflights. A mix of curfews and conversion to best available quiet technology aircraft would be implemented to achieve project objectives. Alternative E would allow a daily maximum 364 total operations by air-tour and air-tour-related flights in the SFRA, and an annual maximum 93,971 flights. Alternative F minimizes changes from current practices but would include Dragon Corridor seasonal shifts, one general-aviation corridor closure, and quiet-technology incentives. Alternative F would have the same annual allocation provision of 93,971 commercial air-tour operations, but there would be no daily cap. The preferred alternative would implement rules for alternating use of Zuni Point and Dragon Corridors for short-loop tours, raising flight-free zone upper boundaries to 18,000 feet, quiet-technology incentives, modified tour routes to avoid sensitive resources, modified curfews, full conversion to quiet-technology aircraft, and moving most non-tour flights outside the SFRA. Air-tours and air-tour-related operations would have an annual allocation limit of 65,000 flights, with a daily cap of 364 air-tours. Under all alternatives, operations in support of the Hualapai Tribe would continue exempt from annual allocations and daily caps. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would restore natural quiet and experience at GCNP while maintaining compliance with FAA laws, regulations and policies regarding aviation safety and airspace management. Under the preferred alternative, a range of tours year-round, and iconic views would be available for aerial viewing from a variety of routes. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Overflights would continue to adversely affect wildlife to varying degrees in different sections of GCNP. Species affected include peregrine falcon, California condor, and Mexican spotted owl. More restrictive regulation would have long-term, minor to moderate effects on air tour operators, Native American tribes, and general aviation in the study area. LEGAL MANDATES: National Park Service Organic Act of 1916 (16 U.S.C. 1 et seq.), National Parks Air Tour Management Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-181), and National Parks Overflights Act of 1987 (P.L. 100-91). JF - EPA number: 110036, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--671 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume 2)--341 pages, February 18, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Air Transportation KW - Agency number: DES 10-60 KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Birds KW - Helicopters KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Indian Reservations KW - National Parks KW - Noise Assessments KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Regulations KW - Transportation KW - Wild and Scenic Rivers KW - Wilderness KW - Wilderness Management KW - Wildlife KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arizona KW - Grand Canyon National Park KW - National Park Service Organic Act of 1916, Compliance KW - National Parks Air Tour Management Act of 2000, Compliance KW - National Parks Overflights Act of 1987, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/16385406?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+CANYON+NATIONAL+PARK+SPECIAL+FLIGHT+RULES+AREA%2C+COCONINO+COUNTY%2C+ARIZONA.&rft.title=GRAND+CANYON+NATIONAL+PARK+SPECIAL+FLIGHT+RULES+AREA%2C+COCONINO+COUNTY%2C+ARIZONA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Grand Canyon, Arizona; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 41 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, BROWN COUNTY, WISCONSIN. [Part 1 of 3] T2 - US 41 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, BROWN COUNTY, WISCONSIN. AN - 873128269; 14790-4_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction of a 3.3-mile segment of US Highway 41 from Memorial Drive to County Road M in Brown County, Wisconsin is proposed. Within the project area, US 41 and Interstate 43 (I-43) serve the City of Green Bay, Village of Howard, Village of Suamico, and surrounding communities. US 41 and I-43 provide a vital north-south transportation link between the Chicago-Milwaukee metropolitan area, the Fox River Valley industrial area, and recreational areas in northeastern Wisconsin and upper Michigan. US 41 is a multi-lane backbone highway and a National Highway System route that is also being planned for future conversion to an interstate highway between Milwaukee and I-43 in Green Bay. The existing US 41 freeway and its interchanges were constructed over 35 years ago and do not meet current design standards. Close proximity of the US 141/Velp Avenue and I-43 interchanges causes operational deficiencies and safety concerns due to inadequate traffic weaving distances. Proposed improvements include reconstructing the interchanges at US 141/Velp Avenue, I-43, and County Road M to meet current design standards, adding an additional lane in each direction on the US 41 mainline, adding auxiliary lanes along US 41 in both directions, constructing new bridges along US 41 over US 141/Velp Avenue, CN Railroad, Wietor Drive, I-43, and Duck Creek, and replacing the County EB/Lakeview Drive structure and the County Road M structure over US 41. In addition, roundabouts would be constructed at the US 141/Velp Avenue interchange ramp terminals, the US 141/Velp Avenue/Memorial Drive intersection east of US 41, the County Road M interchange ramp terminals, and the frontage road intersections with County Road M. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative (Alternative A) are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under Alternative D, US 41 would be expanded on a revised alignment that would allow for a freeway split for southbound US 41 to southbound I-43 within the existing interchange footprint. Collector-distributor roads would be constructed on both sides of US 41 between US 141/Velp Avenue and I-43 to accommodate traffic weaving movements. Minor improvements would be made to existing indirect loop ramp geometry at the I-43/US 41 system interchange to accommodate the wider US 41 mainline. Alternative E would involve expanding US 41 with a full reconfiguration of the I-43/US 41 interchange. The US 41 expansion would include a revised northbound alignment, and a raised northbound gradeline to accommodate the southbound US 41 to southbound I-43 ramp within the existing interchange footprint and the northbound I-43 to southbound US 41 flyover ramp piers and foundations. All loop ramps would be eliminated and the I/43/US 41 system interchange would be reconstructed with directional ramps. The existing access between US 141/Velp Avenue and I-43 via US 41 would be eliminated and Atkinson Avenue or an alternate route would be used to access southbound I-43 from US 141/Velp Avenue or to access US 141/Velp Avenue from northbound I-43. Estimated construction costs of Alternative D and Alternative E are $220 million and $230 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The reconstructed highway and interchanges would address geometric and operational deficiencies, improve traffic flow and safety, and help meet traffic demand and mobility needs including future conversion of US 41 to an interstate highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way requirements under alternatives D and E would convert 29 acres and 37 acres of land, respectively. Construction would involve two stream crossings, one stream realignment, and impacts to 54 to 55 acres of wetlands. Habitat for Blanding's turtle, wood turtle, common tern, black-crowned night heron, and cattle egret could be affected. The build alternatives would impact 8.4 to 12.2 acres of park land and conservation areas and require relocation of 13 residences and one business. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110034, 233 pages and maps, February 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-11-01-D KW - Birds KW - Creeks KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128269?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+41+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT%2C+BROWN+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN.&rft.title=US+41+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT%2C+BROWN+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 41 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, BROWN COUNTY, WISCONSIN. [Part 3 of 3] T2 - US 41 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, BROWN COUNTY, WISCONSIN. AN - 873126874; 14790-4_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction of a 3.3-mile segment of US Highway 41 from Memorial Drive to County Road M in Brown County, Wisconsin is proposed. Within the project area, US 41 and Interstate 43 (I-43) serve the City of Green Bay, Village of Howard, Village of Suamico, and surrounding communities. US 41 and I-43 provide a vital north-south transportation link between the Chicago-Milwaukee metropolitan area, the Fox River Valley industrial area, and recreational areas in northeastern Wisconsin and upper Michigan. US 41 is a multi-lane backbone highway and a National Highway System route that is also being planned for future conversion to an interstate highway between Milwaukee and I-43 in Green Bay. The existing US 41 freeway and its interchanges were constructed over 35 years ago and do not meet current design standards. Close proximity of the US 141/Velp Avenue and I-43 interchanges causes operational deficiencies and safety concerns due to inadequate traffic weaving distances. Proposed improvements include reconstructing the interchanges at US 141/Velp Avenue, I-43, and County Road M to meet current design standards, adding an additional lane in each direction on the US 41 mainline, adding auxiliary lanes along US 41 in both directions, constructing new bridges along US 41 over US 141/Velp Avenue, CN Railroad, Wietor Drive, I-43, and Duck Creek, and replacing the County EB/Lakeview Drive structure and the County Road M structure over US 41. In addition, roundabouts would be constructed at the US 141/Velp Avenue interchange ramp terminals, the US 141/Velp Avenue/Memorial Drive intersection east of US 41, the County Road M interchange ramp terminals, and the frontage road intersections with County Road M. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative (Alternative A) are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under Alternative D, US 41 would be expanded on a revised alignment that would allow for a freeway split for southbound US 41 to southbound I-43 within the existing interchange footprint. Collector-distributor roads would be constructed on both sides of US 41 between US 141/Velp Avenue and I-43 to accommodate traffic weaving movements. Minor improvements would be made to existing indirect loop ramp geometry at the I-43/US 41 system interchange to accommodate the wider US 41 mainline. Alternative E would involve expanding US 41 with a full reconfiguration of the I-43/US 41 interchange. The US 41 expansion would include a revised northbound alignment, and a raised northbound gradeline to accommodate the southbound US 41 to southbound I-43 ramp within the existing interchange footprint and the northbound I-43 to southbound US 41 flyover ramp piers and foundations. All loop ramps would be eliminated and the I/43/US 41 system interchange would be reconstructed with directional ramps. The existing access between US 141/Velp Avenue and I-43 via US 41 would be eliminated and Atkinson Avenue or an alternate route would be used to access southbound I-43 from US 141/Velp Avenue or to access US 141/Velp Avenue from northbound I-43. Estimated construction costs of Alternative D and Alternative E are $220 million and $230 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The reconstructed highway and interchanges would address geometric and operational deficiencies, improve traffic flow and safety, and help meet traffic demand and mobility needs including future conversion of US 41 to an interstate highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way requirements under alternatives D and E would convert 29 acres and 37 acres of land, respectively. Construction would involve two stream crossings, one stream realignment, and impacts to 54 to 55 acres of wetlands. Habitat for Blanding's turtle, wood turtle, common tern, black-crowned night heron, and cattle egret could be affected. The build alternatives would impact 8.4 to 12.2 acres of park land and conservation areas and require relocation of 13 residences and one business. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110034, 233 pages and maps, February 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-11-01-D KW - Birds KW - Creeks KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126874?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+41+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT%2C+BROWN+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN.&rft.title=US+41+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT%2C+BROWN+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 41 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, BROWN COUNTY, WISCONSIN. [Part 2 of 3] T2 - US 41 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, BROWN COUNTY, WISCONSIN. AN - 873126867; 14790-4_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction of a 3.3-mile segment of US Highway 41 from Memorial Drive to County Road M in Brown County, Wisconsin is proposed. Within the project area, US 41 and Interstate 43 (I-43) serve the City of Green Bay, Village of Howard, Village of Suamico, and surrounding communities. US 41 and I-43 provide a vital north-south transportation link between the Chicago-Milwaukee metropolitan area, the Fox River Valley industrial area, and recreational areas in northeastern Wisconsin and upper Michigan. US 41 is a multi-lane backbone highway and a National Highway System route that is also being planned for future conversion to an interstate highway between Milwaukee and I-43 in Green Bay. The existing US 41 freeway and its interchanges were constructed over 35 years ago and do not meet current design standards. Close proximity of the US 141/Velp Avenue and I-43 interchanges causes operational deficiencies and safety concerns due to inadequate traffic weaving distances. Proposed improvements include reconstructing the interchanges at US 141/Velp Avenue, I-43, and County Road M to meet current design standards, adding an additional lane in each direction on the US 41 mainline, adding auxiliary lanes along US 41 in both directions, constructing new bridges along US 41 over US 141/Velp Avenue, CN Railroad, Wietor Drive, I-43, and Duck Creek, and replacing the County EB/Lakeview Drive structure and the County Road M structure over US 41. In addition, roundabouts would be constructed at the US 141/Velp Avenue interchange ramp terminals, the US 141/Velp Avenue/Memorial Drive intersection east of US 41, the County Road M interchange ramp terminals, and the frontage road intersections with County Road M. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative (Alternative A) are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under Alternative D, US 41 would be expanded on a revised alignment that would allow for a freeway split for southbound US 41 to southbound I-43 within the existing interchange footprint. Collector-distributor roads would be constructed on both sides of US 41 between US 141/Velp Avenue and I-43 to accommodate traffic weaving movements. Minor improvements would be made to existing indirect loop ramp geometry at the I-43/US 41 system interchange to accommodate the wider US 41 mainline. Alternative E would involve expanding US 41 with a full reconfiguration of the I-43/US 41 interchange. The US 41 expansion would include a revised northbound alignment, and a raised northbound gradeline to accommodate the southbound US 41 to southbound I-43 ramp within the existing interchange footprint and the northbound I-43 to southbound US 41 flyover ramp piers and foundations. All loop ramps would be eliminated and the I/43/US 41 system interchange would be reconstructed with directional ramps. The existing access between US 141/Velp Avenue and I-43 via US 41 would be eliminated and Atkinson Avenue or an alternate route would be used to access southbound I-43 from US 141/Velp Avenue or to access US 141/Velp Avenue from northbound I-43. Estimated construction costs of Alternative D and Alternative E are $220 million and $230 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The reconstructed highway and interchanges would address geometric and operational deficiencies, improve traffic flow and safety, and help meet traffic demand and mobility needs including future conversion of US 41 to an interstate highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way requirements under alternatives D and E would convert 29 acres and 37 acres of land, respectively. Construction would involve two stream crossings, one stream realignment, and impacts to 54 to 55 acres of wetlands. Habitat for Blanding's turtle, wood turtle, common tern, black-crowned night heron, and cattle egret could be affected. The build alternatives would impact 8.4 to 12.2 acres of park land and conservation areas and require relocation of 13 residences and one business. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110034, 233 pages and maps, February 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-11-01-D KW - Birds KW - Creeks KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126867?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+41+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT%2C+BROWN+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN.&rft.title=US+41+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT%2C+BROWN+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 41 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, BROWN COUNTY, WISCONSIN. AN - 16372600; 14790 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction of a 3.3-mile segment of US Highway 41 from Memorial Drive to County Road M in Brown County, Wisconsin is proposed. Within the project area, US 41 and Interstate 43 (I-43) serve the City of Green Bay, Village of Howard, Village of Suamico, and surrounding communities. US 41 and I-43 provide a vital north-south transportation link between the Chicago-Milwaukee metropolitan area, the Fox River Valley industrial area, and recreational areas in northeastern Wisconsin and upper Michigan. US 41 is a multi-lane backbone highway and a National Highway System route that is also being planned for future conversion to an interstate highway between Milwaukee and I-43 in Green Bay. The existing US 41 freeway and its interchanges were constructed over 35 years ago and do not meet current design standards. Close proximity of the US 141/Velp Avenue and I-43 interchanges causes operational deficiencies and safety concerns due to inadequate traffic weaving distances. Proposed improvements include reconstructing the interchanges at US 141/Velp Avenue, I-43, and County Road M to meet current design standards, adding an additional lane in each direction on the US 41 mainline, adding auxiliary lanes along US 41 in both directions, constructing new bridges along US 41 over US 141/Velp Avenue, CN Railroad, Wietor Drive, I-43, and Duck Creek, and replacing the County EB/Lakeview Drive structure and the County Road M structure over US 41. In addition, roundabouts would be constructed at the US 141/Velp Avenue interchange ramp terminals, the US 141/Velp Avenue/Memorial Drive intersection east of US 41, the County Road M interchange ramp terminals, and the frontage road intersections with County Road M. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative (Alternative A) are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under Alternative D, US 41 would be expanded on a revised alignment that would allow for a freeway split for southbound US 41 to southbound I-43 within the existing interchange footprint. Collector-distributor roads would be constructed on both sides of US 41 between US 141/Velp Avenue and I-43 to accommodate traffic weaving movements. Minor improvements would be made to existing indirect loop ramp geometry at the I-43/US 41 system interchange to accommodate the wider US 41 mainline. Alternative E would involve expanding US 41 with a full reconfiguration of the I-43/US 41 interchange. The US 41 expansion would include a revised northbound alignment, and a raised northbound gradeline to accommodate the southbound US 41 to southbound I-43 ramp within the existing interchange footprint and the northbound I-43 to southbound US 41 flyover ramp piers and foundations. All loop ramps would be eliminated and the I/43/US 41 system interchange would be reconstructed with directional ramps. The existing access between US 141/Velp Avenue and I-43 via US 41 would be eliminated and Atkinson Avenue or an alternate route would be used to access southbound I-43 from US 141/Velp Avenue or to access US 141/Velp Avenue from northbound I-43. Estimated construction costs of Alternative D and Alternative E are $220 million and $230 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The reconstructed highway and interchanges would address geometric and operational deficiencies, improve traffic flow and safety, and help meet traffic demand and mobility needs including future conversion of US 41 to an interstate highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way requirements under alternatives D and E would convert 29 acres and 37 acres of land, respectively. Construction would involve two stream crossings, one stream realignment, and impacts to 54 to 55 acres of wetlands. Habitat for Blanding's turtle, wood turtle, common tern, black-crowned night heron, and cattle egret could be affected. The build alternatives would impact 8.4 to 12.2 acres of park land and conservation areas and require relocation of 13 residences and one business. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110034, 233 pages and maps, February 11, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-11-01-D KW - Birds KW - Creeks KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/16372600?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-02-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+41+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT%2C+BROWN+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN.&rft.title=US+41+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT%2C+BROWN+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: February 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Individual differences of pedestrian behaviour in midblock crosswalk and intersection AN - 888113932; 15527085 AB - Motor vehicle crashes involving pedestrians have recently become a major traffic safety problem. Pedestrian error is defined as a risk event that can be described by uncensored waiting duration. This paper presents a parametric duration model for analysis of pedestrian behaviour in midblock crosswalk and intersection, which can be used to explain when and why pedestrians cross the street in error. In order to identify individual differences in pedestrian behaviour based on specific error-inducing factors in midblock crosswalk and intersection, the endurance probability and risk rate for pedestrian crossing behaviour are calculated with different waiting durations by the exponential, Weibull and log-logistic distributions. The results show the relationship of pedestrian behaviour and waiting duration. JF - International Journal of Crashworthiness AU - Wang, Wuhong AU - Guo, Hongwei AU - Gao, Ziyou AU - Bubb, Heiner AD - Department of Transportation Engineering, School of Mechanical and Vehicular Engineering, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing, China Y1 - 2011/02// PY - 2011 DA - Feb 2011 SP - 1 EP - 9 PB - Taylor & Francis Group Ltd., 2 Park Square Oxford OX14 4RN United Kingdom VL - 16 IS - 1 SN - 1358-8265, 1358-8265 KW - Risk Abstracts; Health & Safety Science Abstracts KW - motor vehicle crashes KW - pedestrian violation KW - waiting duration KW - traffic safety KW - crashworthiness KW - Accidents KW - pedestrians KW - H 2000:Transportation KW - R2 23060:Medical and environmental health UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/888113932?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ariskabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=International+Journal+of+Crashworthiness&rft.atitle=Individual+differences+of+pedestrian+behaviour+in+midblock+crosswalk+and+intersection&rft.au=Wang%2C+Wuhong%3BGuo%2C+Hongwei%3BGao%2C+Ziyou%3BBubb%2C+Heiner&rft.aulast=Wang&rft.aufirst=Wuhong&rft.date=2011-02-01&rft.volume=16&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=1&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=International+Journal+of+Crashworthiness&rft.issn=13588265&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080%2F13588265.2010.491715 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2011-09-01 N1 - Last updated - 2015-03-19 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - crashworthiness; Accidents; pedestrians; traffic safety DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13588265.2010.491715 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PALM BEACH INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 2 of 11] T2 - PALM BEACH INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 873129740; 14783-7_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The approval of an airport layout plan for the construction and operation of airfield improvements at Palm Beach International Airport (PBIA), Palm Beach County, Florida is requested. PBIA, which is owned by the county and operated by Palm Beach County Department of Airports (DOA), is designated as a medium-hub primary commercial service airport and accounts for between 0.25 and 1.0 percent of total revenue passengers enplaned by U.S. flag air carriers in the United States. In 2006, 18 commercial passenger air carriers served the airport and accounted for 192,775 aircraft operations and more than 3.4 million passenger enplanements. In 2009, 15 commercial passenger air carriers served PBIA and approximately 6 million passengers used the airport. As a result of the economic recession which occurred after the publication of the draft EIS in September 2008, a revised two-phase implementation plan and schedule for the airfield improvement project (AIP) was proposed. The near-term AIP would include the development of general aviation facilities in the northwest quadrant of the airport, widening the full length of Taxiway L from 50 feet to 75 feet, and acquisition of approximately 13.2 acres of land west of the airport. The long-term AIP would consist of the primary capacity component of the AIP and would be considered for approval only when the number of aircraft operations at PBIA returns to the levels that would cause unacceptable operational delay. Proposed long-term AIP improvements would include relocation, extension, and widening of Runway 10R/28L (formerly designated 9R/27L) to a length of 8,000 feet and a width of 150 feet; shortening Runway 14/32 (formerly designated 13/31) to 4,000 feet; construction of new taxiways and modification of existing taxiways; installation of navigational aids (localizer antenna) and implementation of GPS-based instrument procedures for the new Runway 10R/28L; installation of runway and taxiway edge lights for the new and relocated runways and taxiways; acquisition of additional land west of the airport for the Runway 10R/28L protection zone; relocation of approximately 750 feet of the Airport West Canal; relocation of general aviation support facilities from the southeast quadrant of the airport to the northwest quadrant of the airport; and relocation of the very high frequency omni-directional range and remote transmitter/receiver instruments. In addition to the DOA's proposed AIP, this final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and one reasonable airfield development alternative (Alternative 2). Alternative 2 would provide the capability to primarily utilize the new north parallel Runway 10L/28R for departures and the existing Runway 10L/28R (future Runway 10R/28L) for arrivals, thus providing a greater degree of operational efficiency and safety, while at the same time offering increased rates of hourly aircraft arrivals and departures. Cost of the DOA's proposal, which is the preferred alternative, are estimated at $370 million. The cost of Alternative 2 is estimated at $730 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The development of general aviation facilities would address existing fixed base operator needs and provide for future facility needs. Acquisition of adjacent properties would better secure and define the airport's boundary. Increased capacity and efficiency of operations at the airport would relieve anticipated overcrowding and the associated operational safety risks. Greater efficiency and capacity in the movement of passenger and cargo carriers would significantly enhance the local and regional economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The improvements would require the displacement of five residential parcels and 27 off-site and four on-site business enterprises. The project would increase the area covered by impervious surface at the airport, increasing runoff and the delivery of pollutants to local surface flows. The area affected by aircraft noise would increase by 104 acres. Implementation of the long-term AIP would result in noise impacts to 772 more residents living in 291 units. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Safety Expansion Act of 1987 (P.L. 100-223) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0368D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110027, Final EIS--644 pages and maps, Appendices A through I--766 pages and maps, Appendix J--673 pages, Appendices K through L--810 pages, all on CD-ROM, January 28, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Air Transportation KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Florida KW - Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129740?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PALM+BEACH+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT%2C+PALM+BEACH+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=PALM+BEACH+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT%2C+PALM+BEACH+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Orlando, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 28, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PALM BEACH INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 1 of 11] T2 - PALM BEACH INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 873129727; 14783-7_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The approval of an airport layout plan for the construction and operation of airfield improvements at Palm Beach International Airport (PBIA), Palm Beach County, Florida is requested. PBIA, which is owned by the county and operated by Palm Beach County Department of Airports (DOA), is designated as a medium-hub primary commercial service airport and accounts for between 0.25 and 1.0 percent of total revenue passengers enplaned by U.S. flag air carriers in the United States. In 2006, 18 commercial passenger air carriers served the airport and accounted for 192,775 aircraft operations and more than 3.4 million passenger enplanements. In 2009, 15 commercial passenger air carriers served PBIA and approximately 6 million passengers used the airport. As a result of the economic recession which occurred after the publication of the draft EIS in September 2008, a revised two-phase implementation plan and schedule for the airfield improvement project (AIP) was proposed. The near-term AIP would include the development of general aviation facilities in the northwest quadrant of the airport, widening the full length of Taxiway L from 50 feet to 75 feet, and acquisition of approximately 13.2 acres of land west of the airport. The long-term AIP would consist of the primary capacity component of the AIP and would be considered for approval only when the number of aircraft operations at PBIA returns to the levels that would cause unacceptable operational delay. Proposed long-term AIP improvements would include relocation, extension, and widening of Runway 10R/28L (formerly designated 9R/27L) to a length of 8,000 feet and a width of 150 feet; shortening Runway 14/32 (formerly designated 13/31) to 4,000 feet; construction of new taxiways and modification of existing taxiways; installation of navigational aids (localizer antenna) and implementation of GPS-based instrument procedures for the new Runway 10R/28L; installation of runway and taxiway edge lights for the new and relocated runways and taxiways; acquisition of additional land west of the airport for the Runway 10R/28L protection zone; relocation of approximately 750 feet of the Airport West Canal; relocation of general aviation support facilities from the southeast quadrant of the airport to the northwest quadrant of the airport; and relocation of the very high frequency omni-directional range and remote transmitter/receiver instruments. In addition to the DOA's proposed AIP, this final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and one reasonable airfield development alternative (Alternative 2). Alternative 2 would provide the capability to primarily utilize the new north parallel Runway 10L/28R for departures and the existing Runway 10L/28R (future Runway 10R/28L) for arrivals, thus providing a greater degree of operational efficiency and safety, while at the same time offering increased rates of hourly aircraft arrivals and departures. Cost of the DOA's proposal, which is the preferred alternative, are estimated at $370 million. The cost of Alternative 2 is estimated at $730 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The development of general aviation facilities would address existing fixed base operator needs and provide for future facility needs. Acquisition of adjacent properties would better secure and define the airport's boundary. Increased capacity and efficiency of operations at the airport would relieve anticipated overcrowding and the associated operational safety risks. Greater efficiency and capacity in the movement of passenger and cargo carriers would significantly enhance the local and regional economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The improvements would require the displacement of five residential parcels and 27 off-site and four on-site business enterprises. The project would increase the area covered by impervious surface at the airport, increasing runoff and the delivery of pollutants to local surface flows. The area affected by aircraft noise would increase by 104 acres. Implementation of the long-term AIP would result in noise impacts to 772 more residents living in 291 units. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Safety Expansion Act of 1987 (P.L. 100-223) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0368D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110027, Final EIS--644 pages and maps, Appendices A through I--766 pages and maps, Appendix J--673 pages, Appendices K through L--810 pages, all on CD-ROM, January 28, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Air Transportation KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Florida KW - Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129727?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PALM+BEACH+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT%2C+PALM+BEACH+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=PALM+BEACH+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT%2C+PALM+BEACH+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Orlando, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 28, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PALM BEACH INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 8 of 11] T2 - PALM BEACH INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 873128648; 14783-7_0008 AB - PURPOSE: The approval of an airport layout plan for the construction and operation of airfield improvements at Palm Beach International Airport (PBIA), Palm Beach County, Florida is requested. PBIA, which is owned by the county and operated by Palm Beach County Department of Airports (DOA), is designated as a medium-hub primary commercial service airport and accounts for between 0.25 and 1.0 percent of total revenue passengers enplaned by U.S. flag air carriers in the United States. In 2006, 18 commercial passenger air carriers served the airport and accounted for 192,775 aircraft operations and more than 3.4 million passenger enplanements. In 2009, 15 commercial passenger air carriers served PBIA and approximately 6 million passengers used the airport. As a result of the economic recession which occurred after the publication of the draft EIS in September 2008, a revised two-phase implementation plan and schedule for the airfield improvement project (AIP) was proposed. The near-term AIP would include the development of general aviation facilities in the northwest quadrant of the airport, widening the full length of Taxiway L from 50 feet to 75 feet, and acquisition of approximately 13.2 acres of land west of the airport. The long-term AIP would consist of the primary capacity component of the AIP and would be considered for approval only when the number of aircraft operations at PBIA returns to the levels that would cause unacceptable operational delay. Proposed long-term AIP improvements would include relocation, extension, and widening of Runway 10R/28L (formerly designated 9R/27L) to a length of 8,000 feet and a width of 150 feet; shortening Runway 14/32 (formerly designated 13/31) to 4,000 feet; construction of new taxiways and modification of existing taxiways; installation of navigational aids (localizer antenna) and implementation of GPS-based instrument procedures for the new Runway 10R/28L; installation of runway and taxiway edge lights for the new and relocated runways and taxiways; acquisition of additional land west of the airport for the Runway 10R/28L protection zone; relocation of approximately 750 feet of the Airport West Canal; relocation of general aviation support facilities from the southeast quadrant of the airport to the northwest quadrant of the airport; and relocation of the very high frequency omni-directional range and remote transmitter/receiver instruments. In addition to the DOA's proposed AIP, this final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and one reasonable airfield development alternative (Alternative 2). Alternative 2 would provide the capability to primarily utilize the new north parallel Runway 10L/28R for departures and the existing Runway 10L/28R (future Runway 10R/28L) for arrivals, thus providing a greater degree of operational efficiency and safety, while at the same time offering increased rates of hourly aircraft arrivals and departures. Cost of the DOA's proposal, which is the preferred alternative, are estimated at $370 million. The cost of Alternative 2 is estimated at $730 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The development of general aviation facilities would address existing fixed base operator needs and provide for future facility needs. Acquisition of adjacent properties would better secure and define the airport's boundary. Increased capacity and efficiency of operations at the airport would relieve anticipated overcrowding and the associated operational safety risks. Greater efficiency and capacity in the movement of passenger and cargo carriers would significantly enhance the local and regional economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The improvements would require the displacement of five residential parcels and 27 off-site and four on-site business enterprises. The project would increase the area covered by impervious surface at the airport, increasing runoff and the delivery of pollutants to local surface flows. The area affected by aircraft noise would increase by 104 acres. Implementation of the long-term AIP would result in noise impacts to 772 more residents living in 291 units. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Safety Expansion Act of 1987 (P.L. 100-223) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0368D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110027, Final EIS--644 pages and maps, Appendices A through I--766 pages and maps, Appendix J--673 pages, Appendices K through L--810 pages, all on CD-ROM, January 28, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 8 KW - Air Transportation KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Florida KW - Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128648?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PALM+BEACH+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT%2C+PALM+BEACH+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=PALM+BEACH+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT%2C+PALM+BEACH+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Orlando, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 28, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PALM BEACH INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 7 of 11] T2 - PALM BEACH INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 873128628; 14783-7_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The approval of an airport layout plan for the construction and operation of airfield improvements at Palm Beach International Airport (PBIA), Palm Beach County, Florida is requested. PBIA, which is owned by the county and operated by Palm Beach County Department of Airports (DOA), is designated as a medium-hub primary commercial service airport and accounts for between 0.25 and 1.0 percent of total revenue passengers enplaned by U.S. flag air carriers in the United States. In 2006, 18 commercial passenger air carriers served the airport and accounted for 192,775 aircraft operations and more than 3.4 million passenger enplanements. In 2009, 15 commercial passenger air carriers served PBIA and approximately 6 million passengers used the airport. As a result of the economic recession which occurred after the publication of the draft EIS in September 2008, a revised two-phase implementation plan and schedule for the airfield improvement project (AIP) was proposed. The near-term AIP would include the development of general aviation facilities in the northwest quadrant of the airport, widening the full length of Taxiway L from 50 feet to 75 feet, and acquisition of approximately 13.2 acres of land west of the airport. The long-term AIP would consist of the primary capacity component of the AIP and would be considered for approval only when the number of aircraft operations at PBIA returns to the levels that would cause unacceptable operational delay. Proposed long-term AIP improvements would include relocation, extension, and widening of Runway 10R/28L (formerly designated 9R/27L) to a length of 8,000 feet and a width of 150 feet; shortening Runway 14/32 (formerly designated 13/31) to 4,000 feet; construction of new taxiways and modification of existing taxiways; installation of navigational aids (localizer antenna) and implementation of GPS-based instrument procedures for the new Runway 10R/28L; installation of runway and taxiway edge lights for the new and relocated runways and taxiways; acquisition of additional land west of the airport for the Runway 10R/28L protection zone; relocation of approximately 750 feet of the Airport West Canal; relocation of general aviation support facilities from the southeast quadrant of the airport to the northwest quadrant of the airport; and relocation of the very high frequency omni-directional range and remote transmitter/receiver instruments. In addition to the DOA's proposed AIP, this final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and one reasonable airfield development alternative (Alternative 2). Alternative 2 would provide the capability to primarily utilize the new north parallel Runway 10L/28R for departures and the existing Runway 10L/28R (future Runway 10R/28L) for arrivals, thus providing a greater degree of operational efficiency and safety, while at the same time offering increased rates of hourly aircraft arrivals and departures. Cost of the DOA's proposal, which is the preferred alternative, are estimated at $370 million. The cost of Alternative 2 is estimated at $730 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The development of general aviation facilities would address existing fixed base operator needs and provide for future facility needs. Acquisition of adjacent properties would better secure and define the airport's boundary. Increased capacity and efficiency of operations at the airport would relieve anticipated overcrowding and the associated operational safety risks. Greater efficiency and capacity in the movement of passenger and cargo carriers would significantly enhance the local and regional economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The improvements would require the displacement of five residential parcels and 27 off-site and four on-site business enterprises. The project would increase the area covered by impervious surface at the airport, increasing runoff and the delivery of pollutants to local surface flows. The area affected by aircraft noise would increase by 104 acres. Implementation of the long-term AIP would result in noise impacts to 772 more residents living in 291 units. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Safety Expansion Act of 1987 (P.L. 100-223) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0368D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110027, Final EIS--644 pages and maps, Appendices A through I--766 pages and maps, Appendix J--673 pages, Appendices K through L--810 pages, all on CD-ROM, January 28, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 7 KW - Air Transportation KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Florida KW - Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128628?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PALM+BEACH+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT%2C+PALM+BEACH+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=PALM+BEACH+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT%2C+PALM+BEACH+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Orlando, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 28, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PALM BEACH INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 6 of 11] T2 - PALM BEACH INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 873127825; 14783-7_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The approval of an airport layout plan for the construction and operation of airfield improvements at Palm Beach International Airport (PBIA), Palm Beach County, Florida is requested. PBIA, which is owned by the county and operated by Palm Beach County Department of Airports (DOA), is designated as a medium-hub primary commercial service airport and accounts for between 0.25 and 1.0 percent of total revenue passengers enplaned by U.S. flag air carriers in the United States. In 2006, 18 commercial passenger air carriers served the airport and accounted for 192,775 aircraft operations and more than 3.4 million passenger enplanements. In 2009, 15 commercial passenger air carriers served PBIA and approximately 6 million passengers used the airport. As a result of the economic recession which occurred after the publication of the draft EIS in September 2008, a revised two-phase implementation plan and schedule for the airfield improvement project (AIP) was proposed. The near-term AIP would include the development of general aviation facilities in the northwest quadrant of the airport, widening the full length of Taxiway L from 50 feet to 75 feet, and acquisition of approximately 13.2 acres of land west of the airport. The long-term AIP would consist of the primary capacity component of the AIP and would be considered for approval only when the number of aircraft operations at PBIA returns to the levels that would cause unacceptable operational delay. Proposed long-term AIP improvements would include relocation, extension, and widening of Runway 10R/28L (formerly designated 9R/27L) to a length of 8,000 feet and a width of 150 feet; shortening Runway 14/32 (formerly designated 13/31) to 4,000 feet; construction of new taxiways and modification of existing taxiways; installation of navigational aids (localizer antenna) and implementation of GPS-based instrument procedures for the new Runway 10R/28L; installation of runway and taxiway edge lights for the new and relocated runways and taxiways; acquisition of additional land west of the airport for the Runway 10R/28L protection zone; relocation of approximately 750 feet of the Airport West Canal; relocation of general aviation support facilities from the southeast quadrant of the airport to the northwest quadrant of the airport; and relocation of the very high frequency omni-directional range and remote transmitter/receiver instruments. In addition to the DOA's proposed AIP, this final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and one reasonable airfield development alternative (Alternative 2). Alternative 2 would provide the capability to primarily utilize the new north parallel Runway 10L/28R for departures and the existing Runway 10L/28R (future Runway 10R/28L) for arrivals, thus providing a greater degree of operational efficiency and safety, while at the same time offering increased rates of hourly aircraft arrivals and departures. Cost of the DOA's proposal, which is the preferred alternative, are estimated at $370 million. The cost of Alternative 2 is estimated at $730 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The development of general aviation facilities would address existing fixed base operator needs and provide for future facility needs. Acquisition of adjacent properties would better secure and define the airport's boundary. Increased capacity and efficiency of operations at the airport would relieve anticipated overcrowding and the associated operational safety risks. Greater efficiency and capacity in the movement of passenger and cargo carriers would significantly enhance the local and regional economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The improvements would require the displacement of five residential parcels and 27 off-site and four on-site business enterprises. The project would increase the area covered by impervious surface at the airport, increasing runoff and the delivery of pollutants to local surface flows. The area affected by aircraft noise would increase by 104 acres. Implementation of the long-term AIP would result in noise impacts to 772 more residents living in 291 units. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Safety Expansion Act of 1987 (P.L. 100-223) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0368D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110027, Final EIS--644 pages and maps, Appendices A through I--766 pages and maps, Appendix J--673 pages, Appendices K through L--810 pages, all on CD-ROM, January 28, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 6 KW - Air Transportation KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Florida KW - Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127825?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PALM+BEACH+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT%2C+PALM+BEACH+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=PALM+BEACH+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT%2C+PALM+BEACH+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Orlando, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 28, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PALM BEACH INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 5 of 11] T2 - PALM BEACH INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 873127817; 14783-7_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The approval of an airport layout plan for the construction and operation of airfield improvements at Palm Beach International Airport (PBIA), Palm Beach County, Florida is requested. PBIA, which is owned by the county and operated by Palm Beach County Department of Airports (DOA), is designated as a medium-hub primary commercial service airport and accounts for between 0.25 and 1.0 percent of total revenue passengers enplaned by U.S. flag air carriers in the United States. In 2006, 18 commercial passenger air carriers served the airport and accounted for 192,775 aircraft operations and more than 3.4 million passenger enplanements. In 2009, 15 commercial passenger air carriers served PBIA and approximately 6 million passengers used the airport. As a result of the economic recession which occurred after the publication of the draft EIS in September 2008, a revised two-phase implementation plan and schedule for the airfield improvement project (AIP) was proposed. The near-term AIP would include the development of general aviation facilities in the northwest quadrant of the airport, widening the full length of Taxiway L from 50 feet to 75 feet, and acquisition of approximately 13.2 acres of land west of the airport. The long-term AIP would consist of the primary capacity component of the AIP and would be considered for approval only when the number of aircraft operations at PBIA returns to the levels that would cause unacceptable operational delay. Proposed long-term AIP improvements would include relocation, extension, and widening of Runway 10R/28L (formerly designated 9R/27L) to a length of 8,000 feet and a width of 150 feet; shortening Runway 14/32 (formerly designated 13/31) to 4,000 feet; construction of new taxiways and modification of existing taxiways; installation of navigational aids (localizer antenna) and implementation of GPS-based instrument procedures for the new Runway 10R/28L; installation of runway and taxiway edge lights for the new and relocated runways and taxiways; acquisition of additional land west of the airport for the Runway 10R/28L protection zone; relocation of approximately 750 feet of the Airport West Canal; relocation of general aviation support facilities from the southeast quadrant of the airport to the northwest quadrant of the airport; and relocation of the very high frequency omni-directional range and remote transmitter/receiver instruments. In addition to the DOA's proposed AIP, this final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and one reasonable airfield development alternative (Alternative 2). Alternative 2 would provide the capability to primarily utilize the new north parallel Runway 10L/28R for departures and the existing Runway 10L/28R (future Runway 10R/28L) for arrivals, thus providing a greater degree of operational efficiency and safety, while at the same time offering increased rates of hourly aircraft arrivals and departures. Cost of the DOA's proposal, which is the preferred alternative, are estimated at $370 million. The cost of Alternative 2 is estimated at $730 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The development of general aviation facilities would address existing fixed base operator needs and provide for future facility needs. Acquisition of adjacent properties would better secure and define the airport's boundary. Increased capacity and efficiency of operations at the airport would relieve anticipated overcrowding and the associated operational safety risks. Greater efficiency and capacity in the movement of passenger and cargo carriers would significantly enhance the local and regional economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The improvements would require the displacement of five residential parcels and 27 off-site and four on-site business enterprises. The project would increase the area covered by impervious surface at the airport, increasing runoff and the delivery of pollutants to local surface flows. The area affected by aircraft noise would increase by 104 acres. Implementation of the long-term AIP would result in noise impacts to 772 more residents living in 291 units. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Safety Expansion Act of 1987 (P.L. 100-223) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0368D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110027, Final EIS--644 pages and maps, Appendices A through I--766 pages and maps, Appendix J--673 pages, Appendices K through L--810 pages, all on CD-ROM, January 28, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 5 KW - Air Transportation KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Florida KW - Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127817?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PALM+BEACH+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT%2C+PALM+BEACH+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=PALM+BEACH+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT%2C+PALM+BEACH+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Orlando, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 28, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PALM BEACH INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 4 of 11] T2 - PALM BEACH INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 873127811; 14783-7_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The approval of an airport layout plan for the construction and operation of airfield improvements at Palm Beach International Airport (PBIA), Palm Beach County, Florida is requested. PBIA, which is owned by the county and operated by Palm Beach County Department of Airports (DOA), is designated as a medium-hub primary commercial service airport and accounts for between 0.25 and 1.0 percent of total revenue passengers enplaned by U.S. flag air carriers in the United States. In 2006, 18 commercial passenger air carriers served the airport and accounted for 192,775 aircraft operations and more than 3.4 million passenger enplanements. In 2009, 15 commercial passenger air carriers served PBIA and approximately 6 million passengers used the airport. As a result of the economic recession which occurred after the publication of the draft EIS in September 2008, a revised two-phase implementation plan and schedule for the airfield improvement project (AIP) was proposed. The near-term AIP would include the development of general aviation facilities in the northwest quadrant of the airport, widening the full length of Taxiway L from 50 feet to 75 feet, and acquisition of approximately 13.2 acres of land west of the airport. The long-term AIP would consist of the primary capacity component of the AIP and would be considered for approval only when the number of aircraft operations at PBIA returns to the levels that would cause unacceptable operational delay. Proposed long-term AIP improvements would include relocation, extension, and widening of Runway 10R/28L (formerly designated 9R/27L) to a length of 8,000 feet and a width of 150 feet; shortening Runway 14/32 (formerly designated 13/31) to 4,000 feet; construction of new taxiways and modification of existing taxiways; installation of navigational aids (localizer antenna) and implementation of GPS-based instrument procedures for the new Runway 10R/28L; installation of runway and taxiway edge lights for the new and relocated runways and taxiways; acquisition of additional land west of the airport for the Runway 10R/28L protection zone; relocation of approximately 750 feet of the Airport West Canal; relocation of general aviation support facilities from the southeast quadrant of the airport to the northwest quadrant of the airport; and relocation of the very high frequency omni-directional range and remote transmitter/receiver instruments. In addition to the DOA's proposed AIP, this final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and one reasonable airfield development alternative (Alternative 2). Alternative 2 would provide the capability to primarily utilize the new north parallel Runway 10L/28R for departures and the existing Runway 10L/28R (future Runway 10R/28L) for arrivals, thus providing a greater degree of operational efficiency and safety, while at the same time offering increased rates of hourly aircraft arrivals and departures. Cost of the DOA's proposal, which is the preferred alternative, are estimated at $370 million. The cost of Alternative 2 is estimated at $730 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The development of general aviation facilities would address existing fixed base operator needs and provide for future facility needs. Acquisition of adjacent properties would better secure and define the airport's boundary. Increased capacity and efficiency of operations at the airport would relieve anticipated overcrowding and the associated operational safety risks. Greater efficiency and capacity in the movement of passenger and cargo carriers would significantly enhance the local and regional economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The improvements would require the displacement of five residential parcels and 27 off-site and four on-site business enterprises. The project would increase the area covered by impervious surface at the airport, increasing runoff and the delivery of pollutants to local surface flows. The area affected by aircraft noise would increase by 104 acres. Implementation of the long-term AIP would result in noise impacts to 772 more residents living in 291 units. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Safety Expansion Act of 1987 (P.L. 100-223) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0368D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110027, Final EIS--644 pages and maps, Appendices A through I--766 pages and maps, Appendix J--673 pages, Appendices K through L--810 pages, all on CD-ROM, January 28, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 4 KW - Air Transportation KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Florida KW - Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127811?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PALM+BEACH+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT%2C+PALM+BEACH+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=PALM+BEACH+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT%2C+PALM+BEACH+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Orlando, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 28, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PALM BEACH INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 3 of 11] T2 - PALM BEACH INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 873127802; 14783-7_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The approval of an airport layout plan for the construction and operation of airfield improvements at Palm Beach International Airport (PBIA), Palm Beach County, Florida is requested. PBIA, which is owned by the county and operated by Palm Beach County Department of Airports (DOA), is designated as a medium-hub primary commercial service airport and accounts for between 0.25 and 1.0 percent of total revenue passengers enplaned by U.S. flag air carriers in the United States. In 2006, 18 commercial passenger air carriers served the airport and accounted for 192,775 aircraft operations and more than 3.4 million passenger enplanements. In 2009, 15 commercial passenger air carriers served PBIA and approximately 6 million passengers used the airport. As a result of the economic recession which occurred after the publication of the draft EIS in September 2008, a revised two-phase implementation plan and schedule for the airfield improvement project (AIP) was proposed. The near-term AIP would include the development of general aviation facilities in the northwest quadrant of the airport, widening the full length of Taxiway L from 50 feet to 75 feet, and acquisition of approximately 13.2 acres of land west of the airport. The long-term AIP would consist of the primary capacity component of the AIP and would be considered for approval only when the number of aircraft operations at PBIA returns to the levels that would cause unacceptable operational delay. Proposed long-term AIP improvements would include relocation, extension, and widening of Runway 10R/28L (formerly designated 9R/27L) to a length of 8,000 feet and a width of 150 feet; shortening Runway 14/32 (formerly designated 13/31) to 4,000 feet; construction of new taxiways and modification of existing taxiways; installation of navigational aids (localizer antenna) and implementation of GPS-based instrument procedures for the new Runway 10R/28L; installation of runway and taxiway edge lights for the new and relocated runways and taxiways; acquisition of additional land west of the airport for the Runway 10R/28L protection zone; relocation of approximately 750 feet of the Airport West Canal; relocation of general aviation support facilities from the southeast quadrant of the airport to the northwest quadrant of the airport; and relocation of the very high frequency omni-directional range and remote transmitter/receiver instruments. In addition to the DOA's proposed AIP, this final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and one reasonable airfield development alternative (Alternative 2). Alternative 2 would provide the capability to primarily utilize the new north parallel Runway 10L/28R for departures and the existing Runway 10L/28R (future Runway 10R/28L) for arrivals, thus providing a greater degree of operational efficiency and safety, while at the same time offering increased rates of hourly aircraft arrivals and departures. Cost of the DOA's proposal, which is the preferred alternative, are estimated at $370 million. The cost of Alternative 2 is estimated at $730 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The development of general aviation facilities would address existing fixed base operator needs and provide for future facility needs. Acquisition of adjacent properties would better secure and define the airport's boundary. Increased capacity and efficiency of operations at the airport would relieve anticipated overcrowding and the associated operational safety risks. Greater efficiency and capacity in the movement of passenger and cargo carriers would significantly enhance the local and regional economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The improvements would require the displacement of five residential parcels and 27 off-site and four on-site business enterprises. The project would increase the area covered by impervious surface at the airport, increasing runoff and the delivery of pollutants to local surface flows. The area affected by aircraft noise would increase by 104 acres. Implementation of the long-term AIP would result in noise impacts to 772 more residents living in 291 units. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Safety Expansion Act of 1987 (P.L. 100-223) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0368D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110027, Final EIS--644 pages and maps, Appendices A through I--766 pages and maps, Appendix J--673 pages, Appendices K through L--810 pages, all on CD-ROM, January 28, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 3 KW - Air Transportation KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Florida KW - Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127802?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PALM+BEACH+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT%2C+PALM+BEACH+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=PALM+BEACH+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT%2C+PALM+BEACH+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Orlando, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 28, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PALM BEACH INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 10 of 11] T2 - PALM BEACH INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 873127473; 14783-7_0010 AB - PURPOSE: The approval of an airport layout plan for the construction and operation of airfield improvements at Palm Beach International Airport (PBIA), Palm Beach County, Florida is requested. PBIA, which is owned by the county and operated by Palm Beach County Department of Airports (DOA), is designated as a medium-hub primary commercial service airport and accounts for between 0.25 and 1.0 percent of total revenue passengers enplaned by U.S. flag air carriers in the United States. In 2006, 18 commercial passenger air carriers served the airport and accounted for 192,775 aircraft operations and more than 3.4 million passenger enplanements. In 2009, 15 commercial passenger air carriers served PBIA and approximately 6 million passengers used the airport. As a result of the economic recession which occurred after the publication of the draft EIS in September 2008, a revised two-phase implementation plan and schedule for the airfield improvement project (AIP) was proposed. The near-term AIP would include the development of general aviation facilities in the northwest quadrant of the airport, widening the full length of Taxiway L from 50 feet to 75 feet, and acquisition of approximately 13.2 acres of land west of the airport. The long-term AIP would consist of the primary capacity component of the AIP and would be considered for approval only when the number of aircraft operations at PBIA returns to the levels that would cause unacceptable operational delay. Proposed long-term AIP improvements would include relocation, extension, and widening of Runway 10R/28L (formerly designated 9R/27L) to a length of 8,000 feet and a width of 150 feet; shortening Runway 14/32 (formerly designated 13/31) to 4,000 feet; construction of new taxiways and modification of existing taxiways; installation of navigational aids (localizer antenna) and implementation of GPS-based instrument procedures for the new Runway 10R/28L; installation of runway and taxiway edge lights for the new and relocated runways and taxiways; acquisition of additional land west of the airport for the Runway 10R/28L protection zone; relocation of approximately 750 feet of the Airport West Canal; relocation of general aviation support facilities from the southeast quadrant of the airport to the northwest quadrant of the airport; and relocation of the very high frequency omni-directional range and remote transmitter/receiver instruments. In addition to the DOA's proposed AIP, this final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and one reasonable airfield development alternative (Alternative 2). Alternative 2 would provide the capability to primarily utilize the new north parallel Runway 10L/28R for departures and the existing Runway 10L/28R (future Runway 10R/28L) for arrivals, thus providing a greater degree of operational efficiency and safety, while at the same time offering increased rates of hourly aircraft arrivals and departures. Cost of the DOA's proposal, which is the preferred alternative, are estimated at $370 million. The cost of Alternative 2 is estimated at $730 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The development of general aviation facilities would address existing fixed base operator needs and provide for future facility needs. Acquisition of adjacent properties would better secure and define the airport's boundary. Increased capacity and efficiency of operations at the airport would relieve anticipated overcrowding and the associated operational safety risks. Greater efficiency and capacity in the movement of passenger and cargo carriers would significantly enhance the local and regional economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The improvements would require the displacement of five residential parcels and 27 off-site and four on-site business enterprises. The project would increase the area covered by impervious surface at the airport, increasing runoff and the delivery of pollutants to local surface flows. The area affected by aircraft noise would increase by 104 acres. Implementation of the long-term AIP would result in noise impacts to 772 more residents living in 291 units. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Safety Expansion Act of 1987 (P.L. 100-223) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0368D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110027, Final EIS--644 pages and maps, Appendices A through I--766 pages and maps, Appendix J--673 pages, Appendices K through L--810 pages, all on CD-ROM, January 28, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 10 KW - Air Transportation KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Florida KW - Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127473?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PALM+BEACH+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT%2C+PALM+BEACH+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=PALM+BEACH+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT%2C+PALM+BEACH+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Orlando, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 28, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PALM BEACH INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 9 of 11] T2 - PALM BEACH INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 873127466; 14783-7_0009 AB - PURPOSE: The approval of an airport layout plan for the construction and operation of airfield improvements at Palm Beach International Airport (PBIA), Palm Beach County, Florida is requested. PBIA, which is owned by the county and operated by Palm Beach County Department of Airports (DOA), is designated as a medium-hub primary commercial service airport and accounts for between 0.25 and 1.0 percent of total revenue passengers enplaned by U.S. flag air carriers in the United States. In 2006, 18 commercial passenger air carriers served the airport and accounted for 192,775 aircraft operations and more than 3.4 million passenger enplanements. In 2009, 15 commercial passenger air carriers served PBIA and approximately 6 million passengers used the airport. As a result of the economic recession which occurred after the publication of the draft EIS in September 2008, a revised two-phase implementation plan and schedule for the airfield improvement project (AIP) was proposed. The near-term AIP would include the development of general aviation facilities in the northwest quadrant of the airport, widening the full length of Taxiway L from 50 feet to 75 feet, and acquisition of approximately 13.2 acres of land west of the airport. The long-term AIP would consist of the primary capacity component of the AIP and would be considered for approval only when the number of aircraft operations at PBIA returns to the levels that would cause unacceptable operational delay. Proposed long-term AIP improvements would include relocation, extension, and widening of Runway 10R/28L (formerly designated 9R/27L) to a length of 8,000 feet and a width of 150 feet; shortening Runway 14/32 (formerly designated 13/31) to 4,000 feet; construction of new taxiways and modification of existing taxiways; installation of navigational aids (localizer antenna) and implementation of GPS-based instrument procedures for the new Runway 10R/28L; installation of runway and taxiway edge lights for the new and relocated runways and taxiways; acquisition of additional land west of the airport for the Runway 10R/28L protection zone; relocation of approximately 750 feet of the Airport West Canal; relocation of general aviation support facilities from the southeast quadrant of the airport to the northwest quadrant of the airport; and relocation of the very high frequency omni-directional range and remote transmitter/receiver instruments. In addition to the DOA's proposed AIP, this final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and one reasonable airfield development alternative (Alternative 2). Alternative 2 would provide the capability to primarily utilize the new north parallel Runway 10L/28R for departures and the existing Runway 10L/28R (future Runway 10R/28L) for arrivals, thus providing a greater degree of operational efficiency and safety, while at the same time offering increased rates of hourly aircraft arrivals and departures. Cost of the DOA's proposal, which is the preferred alternative, are estimated at $370 million. The cost of Alternative 2 is estimated at $730 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The development of general aviation facilities would address existing fixed base operator needs and provide for future facility needs. Acquisition of adjacent properties would better secure and define the airport's boundary. Increased capacity and efficiency of operations at the airport would relieve anticipated overcrowding and the associated operational safety risks. Greater efficiency and capacity in the movement of passenger and cargo carriers would significantly enhance the local and regional economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The improvements would require the displacement of five residential parcels and 27 off-site and four on-site business enterprises. The project would increase the area covered by impervious surface at the airport, increasing runoff and the delivery of pollutants to local surface flows. The area affected by aircraft noise would increase by 104 acres. Implementation of the long-term AIP would result in noise impacts to 772 more residents living in 291 units. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Safety Expansion Act of 1987 (P.L. 100-223) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0368D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110027, Final EIS--644 pages and maps, Appendices A through I--766 pages and maps, Appendix J--673 pages, Appendices K through L--810 pages, all on CD-ROM, January 28, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 9 KW - Air Transportation KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Florida KW - Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127466?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PALM+BEACH+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT%2C+PALM+BEACH+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=PALM+BEACH+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT%2C+PALM+BEACH+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Orlando, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 28, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PALM BEACH INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 11 of 11] T2 - PALM BEACH INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 873126934; 14783-7_0011 AB - PURPOSE: The approval of an airport layout plan for the construction and operation of airfield improvements at Palm Beach International Airport (PBIA), Palm Beach County, Florida is requested. PBIA, which is owned by the county and operated by Palm Beach County Department of Airports (DOA), is designated as a medium-hub primary commercial service airport and accounts for between 0.25 and 1.0 percent of total revenue passengers enplaned by U.S. flag air carriers in the United States. In 2006, 18 commercial passenger air carriers served the airport and accounted for 192,775 aircraft operations and more than 3.4 million passenger enplanements. In 2009, 15 commercial passenger air carriers served PBIA and approximately 6 million passengers used the airport. As a result of the economic recession which occurred after the publication of the draft EIS in September 2008, a revised two-phase implementation plan and schedule for the airfield improvement project (AIP) was proposed. The near-term AIP would include the development of general aviation facilities in the northwest quadrant of the airport, widening the full length of Taxiway L from 50 feet to 75 feet, and acquisition of approximately 13.2 acres of land west of the airport. The long-term AIP would consist of the primary capacity component of the AIP and would be considered for approval only when the number of aircraft operations at PBIA returns to the levels that would cause unacceptable operational delay. Proposed long-term AIP improvements would include relocation, extension, and widening of Runway 10R/28L (formerly designated 9R/27L) to a length of 8,000 feet and a width of 150 feet; shortening Runway 14/32 (formerly designated 13/31) to 4,000 feet; construction of new taxiways and modification of existing taxiways; installation of navigational aids (localizer antenna) and implementation of GPS-based instrument procedures for the new Runway 10R/28L; installation of runway and taxiway edge lights for the new and relocated runways and taxiways; acquisition of additional land west of the airport for the Runway 10R/28L protection zone; relocation of approximately 750 feet of the Airport West Canal; relocation of general aviation support facilities from the southeast quadrant of the airport to the northwest quadrant of the airport; and relocation of the very high frequency omni-directional range and remote transmitter/receiver instruments. In addition to the DOA's proposed AIP, this final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and one reasonable airfield development alternative (Alternative 2). Alternative 2 would provide the capability to primarily utilize the new north parallel Runway 10L/28R for departures and the existing Runway 10L/28R (future Runway 10R/28L) for arrivals, thus providing a greater degree of operational efficiency and safety, while at the same time offering increased rates of hourly aircraft arrivals and departures. Cost of the DOA's proposal, which is the preferred alternative, are estimated at $370 million. The cost of Alternative 2 is estimated at $730 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The development of general aviation facilities would address existing fixed base operator needs and provide for future facility needs. Acquisition of adjacent properties would better secure and define the airport's boundary. Increased capacity and efficiency of operations at the airport would relieve anticipated overcrowding and the associated operational safety risks. Greater efficiency and capacity in the movement of passenger and cargo carriers would significantly enhance the local and regional economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The improvements would require the displacement of five residential parcels and 27 off-site and four on-site business enterprises. The project would increase the area covered by impervious surface at the airport, increasing runoff and the delivery of pollutants to local surface flows. The area affected by aircraft noise would increase by 104 acres. Implementation of the long-term AIP would result in noise impacts to 772 more residents living in 291 units. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Safety Expansion Act of 1987 (P.L. 100-223) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0368D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110027, Final EIS--644 pages and maps, Appendices A through I--766 pages and maps, Appendix J--673 pages, Appendices K through L--810 pages, all on CD-ROM, January 28, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 11 KW - Air Transportation KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Florida KW - Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126934?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PALM+BEACH+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT%2C+PALM+BEACH+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=PALM+BEACH+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT%2C+PALM+BEACH+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Orlando, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 28, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PALM BEACH INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 857286527; 14783 AB - PURPOSE: The approval of an airport layout plan for the construction and operation of airfield improvements at Palm Beach International Airport (PBIA), Palm Beach County, Florida is requested. PBIA, which is owned by the county and operated by Palm Beach County Department of Airports (DOA), is designated as a medium-hub primary commercial service airport and accounts for between 0.25 and 1.0 percent of total revenue passengers enplaned by U.S. flag air carriers in the United States. In 2006, 18 commercial passenger air carriers served the airport and accounted for 192,775 aircraft operations and more than 3.4 million passenger enplanements. In 2009, 15 commercial passenger air carriers served PBIA and approximately 6 million passengers used the airport. As a result of the economic recession which occurred after the publication of the draft EIS in September 2008, a revised two-phase implementation plan and schedule for the airfield improvement project (AIP) was proposed. The near-term AIP would include the development of general aviation facilities in the northwest quadrant of the airport, widening the full length of Taxiway L from 50 feet to 75 feet, and acquisition of approximately 13.2 acres of land west of the airport. The long-term AIP would consist of the primary capacity component of the AIP and would be considered for approval only when the number of aircraft operations at PBIA returns to the levels that would cause unacceptable operational delay. Proposed long-term AIP improvements would include relocation, extension, and widening of Runway 10R/28L (formerly designated 9R/27L) to a length of 8,000 feet and a width of 150 feet; shortening Runway 14/32 (formerly designated 13/31) to 4,000 feet; construction of new taxiways and modification of existing taxiways; installation of navigational aids (localizer antenna) and implementation of GPS-based instrument procedures for the new Runway 10R/28L; installation of runway and taxiway edge lights for the new and relocated runways and taxiways; acquisition of additional land west of the airport for the Runway 10R/28L protection zone; relocation of approximately 750 feet of the Airport West Canal; relocation of general aviation support facilities from the southeast quadrant of the airport to the northwest quadrant of the airport; and relocation of the very high frequency omni-directional range and remote transmitter/receiver instruments. In addition to the DOA's proposed AIP, this final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and one reasonable airfield development alternative (Alternative 2). Alternative 2 would provide the capability to primarily utilize the new north parallel Runway 10L/28R for departures and the existing Runway 10L/28R (future Runway 10R/28L) for arrivals, thus providing a greater degree of operational efficiency and safety, while at the same time offering increased rates of hourly aircraft arrivals and departures. Cost of the DOA's proposal, which is the preferred alternative, are estimated at $370 million. The cost of Alternative 2 is estimated at $730 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The development of general aviation facilities would address existing fixed base operator needs and provide for future facility needs. Acquisition of adjacent properties would better secure and define the airport's boundary. Increased capacity and efficiency of operations at the airport would relieve anticipated overcrowding and the associated operational safety risks. Greater efficiency and capacity in the movement of passenger and cargo carriers would significantly enhance the local and regional economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The improvements would require the displacement of five residential parcels and 27 off-site and four on-site business enterprises. The project would increase the area covered by impervious surface at the airport, increasing runoff and the delivery of pollutants to local surface flows. The area affected by aircraft noise would increase by 104 acres. Implementation of the long-term AIP would result in noise impacts to 772 more residents living in 291 units. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Safety Expansion Act of 1987 (P.L. 100-223) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0368D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110027, Final EIS--644 pages and maps, Appendices A through I--766 pages and maps, Appendix J--673 pages, Appendices K through L--810 pages, all on CD-ROM, January 28, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Air Transportation KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Florida KW - Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/857286527?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PALM+BEACH+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT%2C+PALM+BEACH+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=PALM+BEACH+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT%2C+PALM+BEACH+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Orlando, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 28, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 30 of 42] T2 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 873130032; 14781-5_0030 AB - PURPOSE: An 18-mile, high-capacity, fixed-guideway commuter rail transit project from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway 7 (SH 7), serving Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County is proposed. The wedge-shaped North Metro corridor study area includes lower downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. Future population and employment growth in the corridor is expected to increase total vehicle miles travelled by 41 percent between 2007 and 2035 leading to congestion and travel delay. The southern section of the proposed North Metro project would extend from Denver Union Station (DUS) to 84th Avenue, and four alignment options were evaluated to bypass congested Sand Creek Junction. The northern section would extend from 84th Avenue to the SH 7/162nd Avenue area, and one alignment was evaluated. This final EIS compares the preferred build alternative with a No Action Alternative which represents a 2035 horizon-year scenario for the region with no new major transit investment in the North Metro corridor. The preferred alternative would locate the new passenger railway adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Railway Brush Subdivision from the DUS access to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels OBrian Canal to the west, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific Boulder Branch alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area. The majority of the alignment would be single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of Interstate 76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line. Fourteen at-grade railroad/roadway crossing improvement projects would be included. Electric multiple unit commuter rail vehicle technology would be employed with four-car train sets and North Metros eight new stations (plus DUS) would include: National Western Stock Show (Denver), 72nd Avenue South (Commerce City), 88th Avenue (Thornton), 104th Avenue (Thornton), 112th Avenue (Northglenn), 124th Avenue (Thornton), 144th Avenue (Thornton), and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 (Thornton). The 2020 opening day corridor parking supply would be approximately 4,020 spaces. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 with 24,500 riders per weekday in 2035. Opening day capital cost is estimated at $910 million in year of expenditure dollars (2020). POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would connect major activity centers, community resources, and other regional transit services provided by the Regional Transportation District. The preferred alternative would increase mobility in the corridor, provide dependable transit service, and provide an alternative to single-occupant vehicle travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require the acquisition of 121.7 acres and relocation of one residential property and of six businesses. Two acres of wetlands and two acres of other water features would be permanently impacted. Eight parks, 13 recreational trails, one historic site, and two archaeological sites would be affected. With recommended quiet zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, moderate impacts to 180 sites would remain. Multiple hazardous waste sites exist in the project area including 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0443D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110025, Volume I--636 pages, Volume II-- 763 pages, Appendices C, E, F, G and H--CD-ROM, January 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 30 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Central Business Districts KW - Cultural Resources KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130032?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 29 of 42] T2 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 873130017; 14781-5_0029 AB - PURPOSE: An 18-mile, high-capacity, fixed-guideway commuter rail transit project from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway 7 (SH 7), serving Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County is proposed. The wedge-shaped North Metro corridor study area includes lower downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. Future population and employment growth in the corridor is expected to increase total vehicle miles travelled by 41 percent between 2007 and 2035 leading to congestion and travel delay. The southern section of the proposed North Metro project would extend from Denver Union Station (DUS) to 84th Avenue, and four alignment options were evaluated to bypass congested Sand Creek Junction. The northern section would extend from 84th Avenue to the SH 7/162nd Avenue area, and one alignment was evaluated. This final EIS compares the preferred build alternative with a No Action Alternative which represents a 2035 horizon-year scenario for the region with no new major transit investment in the North Metro corridor. The preferred alternative would locate the new passenger railway adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Railway Brush Subdivision from the DUS access to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels OBrian Canal to the west, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific Boulder Branch alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area. The majority of the alignment would be single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of Interstate 76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line. Fourteen at-grade railroad/roadway crossing improvement projects would be included. Electric multiple unit commuter rail vehicle technology would be employed with four-car train sets and North Metros eight new stations (plus DUS) would include: National Western Stock Show (Denver), 72nd Avenue South (Commerce City), 88th Avenue (Thornton), 104th Avenue (Thornton), 112th Avenue (Northglenn), 124th Avenue (Thornton), 144th Avenue (Thornton), and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 (Thornton). The 2020 opening day corridor parking supply would be approximately 4,020 spaces. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 with 24,500 riders per weekday in 2035. Opening day capital cost is estimated at $910 million in year of expenditure dollars (2020). POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would connect major activity centers, community resources, and other regional transit services provided by the Regional Transportation District. The preferred alternative would increase mobility in the corridor, provide dependable transit service, and provide an alternative to single-occupant vehicle travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require the acquisition of 121.7 acres and relocation of one residential property and of six businesses. Two acres of wetlands and two acres of other water features would be permanently impacted. Eight parks, 13 recreational trails, one historic site, and two archaeological sites would be affected. With recommended quiet zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, moderate impacts to 180 sites would remain. Multiple hazardous waste sites exist in the project area including 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0443D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110025, Volume I--636 pages, Volume II-- 763 pages, Appendices C, E, F, G and H--CD-ROM, January 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 29 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Central Business Districts KW - Cultural Resources KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130017?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 28 of 42] T2 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 873130006; 14781-5_0028 AB - PURPOSE: An 18-mile, high-capacity, fixed-guideway commuter rail transit project from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway 7 (SH 7), serving Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County is proposed. The wedge-shaped North Metro corridor study area includes lower downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. Future population and employment growth in the corridor is expected to increase total vehicle miles travelled by 41 percent between 2007 and 2035 leading to congestion and travel delay. The southern section of the proposed North Metro project would extend from Denver Union Station (DUS) to 84th Avenue, and four alignment options were evaluated to bypass congested Sand Creek Junction. The northern section would extend from 84th Avenue to the SH 7/162nd Avenue area, and one alignment was evaluated. This final EIS compares the preferred build alternative with a No Action Alternative which represents a 2035 horizon-year scenario for the region with no new major transit investment in the North Metro corridor. The preferred alternative would locate the new passenger railway adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Railway Brush Subdivision from the DUS access to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels OBrian Canal to the west, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific Boulder Branch alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area. The majority of the alignment would be single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of Interstate 76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line. Fourteen at-grade railroad/roadway crossing improvement projects would be included. Electric multiple unit commuter rail vehicle technology would be employed with four-car train sets and North Metros eight new stations (plus DUS) would include: National Western Stock Show (Denver), 72nd Avenue South (Commerce City), 88th Avenue (Thornton), 104th Avenue (Thornton), 112th Avenue (Northglenn), 124th Avenue (Thornton), 144th Avenue (Thornton), and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 (Thornton). The 2020 opening day corridor parking supply would be approximately 4,020 spaces. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 with 24,500 riders per weekday in 2035. Opening day capital cost is estimated at $910 million in year of expenditure dollars (2020). POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would connect major activity centers, community resources, and other regional transit services provided by the Regional Transportation District. The preferred alternative would increase mobility in the corridor, provide dependable transit service, and provide an alternative to single-occupant vehicle travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require the acquisition of 121.7 acres and relocation of one residential property and of six businesses. Two acres of wetlands and two acres of other water features would be permanently impacted. Eight parks, 13 recreational trails, one historic site, and two archaeological sites would be affected. With recommended quiet zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, moderate impacts to 180 sites would remain. Multiple hazardous waste sites exist in the project area including 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0443D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110025, Volume I--636 pages, Volume II-- 763 pages, Appendices C, E, F, G and H--CD-ROM, January 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 28 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Central Business Districts KW - Cultural Resources KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130006?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 27 of 42] T2 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 873129997; 14781-5_0027 AB - PURPOSE: An 18-mile, high-capacity, fixed-guideway commuter rail transit project from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway 7 (SH 7), serving Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County is proposed. The wedge-shaped North Metro corridor study area includes lower downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. Future population and employment growth in the corridor is expected to increase total vehicle miles travelled by 41 percent between 2007 and 2035 leading to congestion and travel delay. The southern section of the proposed North Metro project would extend from Denver Union Station (DUS) to 84th Avenue, and four alignment options were evaluated to bypass congested Sand Creek Junction. The northern section would extend from 84th Avenue to the SH 7/162nd Avenue area, and one alignment was evaluated. This final EIS compares the preferred build alternative with a No Action Alternative which represents a 2035 horizon-year scenario for the region with no new major transit investment in the North Metro corridor. The preferred alternative would locate the new passenger railway adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Railway Brush Subdivision from the DUS access to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels OBrian Canal to the west, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific Boulder Branch alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area. The majority of the alignment would be single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of Interstate 76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line. Fourteen at-grade railroad/roadway crossing improvement projects would be included. Electric multiple unit commuter rail vehicle technology would be employed with four-car train sets and North Metros eight new stations (plus DUS) would include: National Western Stock Show (Denver), 72nd Avenue South (Commerce City), 88th Avenue (Thornton), 104th Avenue (Thornton), 112th Avenue (Northglenn), 124th Avenue (Thornton), 144th Avenue (Thornton), and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 (Thornton). The 2020 opening day corridor parking supply would be approximately 4,020 spaces. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 with 24,500 riders per weekday in 2035. Opening day capital cost is estimated at $910 million in year of expenditure dollars (2020). POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would connect major activity centers, community resources, and other regional transit services provided by the Regional Transportation District. The preferred alternative would increase mobility in the corridor, provide dependable transit service, and provide an alternative to single-occupant vehicle travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require the acquisition of 121.7 acres and relocation of one residential property and of six businesses. Two acres of wetlands and two acres of other water features would be permanently impacted. Eight parks, 13 recreational trails, one historic site, and two archaeological sites would be affected. With recommended quiet zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, moderate impacts to 180 sites would remain. Multiple hazardous waste sites exist in the project area including 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0443D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110025, Volume I--636 pages, Volume II-- 763 pages, Appendices C, E, F, G and H--CD-ROM, January 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 27 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Central Business Districts KW - Cultural Resources KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129997?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 20 of 42] T2 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 873129962; 14781-5_0020 AB - PURPOSE: An 18-mile, high-capacity, fixed-guideway commuter rail transit project from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway 7 (SH 7), serving Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County is proposed. The wedge-shaped North Metro corridor study area includes lower downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. Future population and employment growth in the corridor is expected to increase total vehicle miles travelled by 41 percent between 2007 and 2035 leading to congestion and travel delay. The southern section of the proposed North Metro project would extend from Denver Union Station (DUS) to 84th Avenue, and four alignment options were evaluated to bypass congested Sand Creek Junction. The northern section would extend from 84th Avenue to the SH 7/162nd Avenue area, and one alignment was evaluated. This final EIS compares the preferred build alternative with a No Action Alternative which represents a 2035 horizon-year scenario for the region with no new major transit investment in the North Metro corridor. The preferred alternative would locate the new passenger railway adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Railway Brush Subdivision from the DUS access to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels OBrian Canal to the west, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific Boulder Branch alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area. The majority of the alignment would be single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of Interstate 76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line. Fourteen at-grade railroad/roadway crossing improvement projects would be included. Electric multiple unit commuter rail vehicle technology would be employed with four-car train sets and North Metros eight new stations (plus DUS) would include: National Western Stock Show (Denver), 72nd Avenue South (Commerce City), 88th Avenue (Thornton), 104th Avenue (Thornton), 112th Avenue (Northglenn), 124th Avenue (Thornton), 144th Avenue (Thornton), and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 (Thornton). The 2020 opening day corridor parking supply would be approximately 4,020 spaces. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 with 24,500 riders per weekday in 2035. Opening day capital cost is estimated at $910 million in year of expenditure dollars (2020). POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would connect major activity centers, community resources, and other regional transit services provided by the Regional Transportation District. The preferred alternative would increase mobility in the corridor, provide dependable transit service, and provide an alternative to single-occupant vehicle travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require the acquisition of 121.7 acres and relocation of one residential property and of six businesses. Two acres of wetlands and two acres of other water features would be permanently impacted. Eight parks, 13 recreational trails, one historic site, and two archaeological sites would be affected. With recommended quiet zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, moderate impacts to 180 sites would remain. Multiple hazardous waste sites exist in the project area including 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0443D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110025, Volume I--636 pages, Volume II-- 763 pages, Appendices C, E, F, G and H--CD-ROM, January 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 20 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Central Business Districts KW - Cultural Resources KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129962?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 19 of 42] T2 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 873129945; 14781-5_0019 AB - PURPOSE: An 18-mile, high-capacity, fixed-guideway commuter rail transit project from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway 7 (SH 7), serving Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County is proposed. The wedge-shaped North Metro corridor study area includes lower downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. Future population and employment growth in the corridor is expected to increase total vehicle miles travelled by 41 percent between 2007 and 2035 leading to congestion and travel delay. The southern section of the proposed North Metro project would extend from Denver Union Station (DUS) to 84th Avenue, and four alignment options were evaluated to bypass congested Sand Creek Junction. The northern section would extend from 84th Avenue to the SH 7/162nd Avenue area, and one alignment was evaluated. This final EIS compares the preferred build alternative with a No Action Alternative which represents a 2035 horizon-year scenario for the region with no new major transit investment in the North Metro corridor. The preferred alternative would locate the new passenger railway adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Railway Brush Subdivision from the DUS access to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels OBrian Canal to the west, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific Boulder Branch alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area. The majority of the alignment would be single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of Interstate 76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line. Fourteen at-grade railroad/roadway crossing improvement projects would be included. Electric multiple unit commuter rail vehicle technology would be employed with four-car train sets and North Metros eight new stations (plus DUS) would include: National Western Stock Show (Denver), 72nd Avenue South (Commerce City), 88th Avenue (Thornton), 104th Avenue (Thornton), 112th Avenue (Northglenn), 124th Avenue (Thornton), 144th Avenue (Thornton), and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 (Thornton). The 2020 opening day corridor parking supply would be approximately 4,020 spaces. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 with 24,500 riders per weekday in 2035. Opening day capital cost is estimated at $910 million in year of expenditure dollars (2020). POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would connect major activity centers, community resources, and other regional transit services provided by the Regional Transportation District. The preferred alternative would increase mobility in the corridor, provide dependable transit service, and provide an alternative to single-occupant vehicle travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require the acquisition of 121.7 acres and relocation of one residential property and of six businesses. Two acres of wetlands and two acres of other water features would be permanently impacted. Eight parks, 13 recreational trails, one historic site, and two archaeological sites would be affected. With recommended quiet zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, moderate impacts to 180 sites would remain. Multiple hazardous waste sites exist in the project area including 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0443D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110025, Volume I--636 pages, Volume II-- 763 pages, Appendices C, E, F, G and H--CD-ROM, January 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 19 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Central Business Districts KW - Cultural Resources KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129945?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 18 of 42] T2 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 873129927; 14781-5_0018 AB - PURPOSE: An 18-mile, high-capacity, fixed-guideway commuter rail transit project from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway 7 (SH 7), serving Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County is proposed. The wedge-shaped North Metro corridor study area includes lower downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. Future population and employment growth in the corridor is expected to increase total vehicle miles travelled by 41 percent between 2007 and 2035 leading to congestion and travel delay. The southern section of the proposed North Metro project would extend from Denver Union Station (DUS) to 84th Avenue, and four alignment options were evaluated to bypass congested Sand Creek Junction. The northern section would extend from 84th Avenue to the SH 7/162nd Avenue area, and one alignment was evaluated. This final EIS compares the preferred build alternative with a No Action Alternative which represents a 2035 horizon-year scenario for the region with no new major transit investment in the North Metro corridor. The preferred alternative would locate the new passenger railway adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Railway Brush Subdivision from the DUS access to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels OBrian Canal to the west, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific Boulder Branch alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area. The majority of the alignment would be single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of Interstate 76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line. Fourteen at-grade railroad/roadway crossing improvement projects would be included. Electric multiple unit commuter rail vehicle technology would be employed with four-car train sets and North Metros eight new stations (plus DUS) would include: National Western Stock Show (Denver), 72nd Avenue South (Commerce City), 88th Avenue (Thornton), 104th Avenue (Thornton), 112th Avenue (Northglenn), 124th Avenue (Thornton), 144th Avenue (Thornton), and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 (Thornton). The 2020 opening day corridor parking supply would be approximately 4,020 spaces. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 with 24,500 riders per weekday in 2035. Opening day capital cost is estimated at $910 million in year of expenditure dollars (2020). POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would connect major activity centers, community resources, and other regional transit services provided by the Regional Transportation District. The preferred alternative would increase mobility in the corridor, provide dependable transit service, and provide an alternative to single-occupant vehicle travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require the acquisition of 121.7 acres and relocation of one residential property and of six businesses. Two acres of wetlands and two acres of other water features would be permanently impacted. Eight parks, 13 recreational trails, one historic site, and two archaeological sites would be affected. With recommended quiet zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, moderate impacts to 180 sites would remain. Multiple hazardous waste sites exist in the project area including 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0443D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110025, Volume I--636 pages, Volume II-- 763 pages, Appendices C, E, F, G and H--CD-ROM, January 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 18 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Central Business Districts KW - Cultural Resources KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129927?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 17 of 42] T2 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 873129910; 14781-5_0017 AB - PURPOSE: An 18-mile, high-capacity, fixed-guideway commuter rail transit project from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway 7 (SH 7), serving Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County is proposed. The wedge-shaped North Metro corridor study area includes lower downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. Future population and employment growth in the corridor is expected to increase total vehicle miles travelled by 41 percent between 2007 and 2035 leading to congestion and travel delay. The southern section of the proposed North Metro project would extend from Denver Union Station (DUS) to 84th Avenue, and four alignment options were evaluated to bypass congested Sand Creek Junction. The northern section would extend from 84th Avenue to the SH 7/162nd Avenue area, and one alignment was evaluated. This final EIS compares the preferred build alternative with a No Action Alternative which represents a 2035 horizon-year scenario for the region with no new major transit investment in the North Metro corridor. The preferred alternative would locate the new passenger railway adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Railway Brush Subdivision from the DUS access to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels OBrian Canal to the west, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific Boulder Branch alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area. The majority of the alignment would be single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of Interstate 76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line. Fourteen at-grade railroad/roadway crossing improvement projects would be included. Electric multiple unit commuter rail vehicle technology would be employed with four-car train sets and North Metros eight new stations (plus DUS) would include: National Western Stock Show (Denver), 72nd Avenue South (Commerce City), 88th Avenue (Thornton), 104th Avenue (Thornton), 112th Avenue (Northglenn), 124th Avenue (Thornton), 144th Avenue (Thornton), and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 (Thornton). The 2020 opening day corridor parking supply would be approximately 4,020 spaces. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 with 24,500 riders per weekday in 2035. Opening day capital cost is estimated at $910 million in year of expenditure dollars (2020). POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would connect major activity centers, community resources, and other regional transit services provided by the Regional Transportation District. The preferred alternative would increase mobility in the corridor, provide dependable transit service, and provide an alternative to single-occupant vehicle travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require the acquisition of 121.7 acres and relocation of one residential property and of six businesses. Two acres of wetlands and two acres of other water features would be permanently impacted. Eight parks, 13 recreational trails, one historic site, and two archaeological sites would be affected. With recommended quiet zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, moderate impacts to 180 sites would remain. Multiple hazardous waste sites exist in the project area including 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0443D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110025, Volume I--636 pages, Volume II-- 763 pages, Appendices C, E, F, G and H--CD-ROM, January 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 17 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Central Business Districts KW - Cultural Resources KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129910?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 14 of 42] T2 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 873129894; 14781-5_0014 AB - PURPOSE: An 18-mile, high-capacity, fixed-guideway commuter rail transit project from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway 7 (SH 7), serving Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County is proposed. The wedge-shaped North Metro corridor study area includes lower downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. Future population and employment growth in the corridor is expected to increase total vehicle miles travelled by 41 percent between 2007 and 2035 leading to congestion and travel delay. The southern section of the proposed North Metro project would extend from Denver Union Station (DUS) to 84th Avenue, and four alignment options were evaluated to bypass congested Sand Creek Junction. The northern section would extend from 84th Avenue to the SH 7/162nd Avenue area, and one alignment was evaluated. This final EIS compares the preferred build alternative with a No Action Alternative which represents a 2035 horizon-year scenario for the region with no new major transit investment in the North Metro corridor. The preferred alternative would locate the new passenger railway adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Railway Brush Subdivision from the DUS access to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels OBrian Canal to the west, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific Boulder Branch alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area. The majority of the alignment would be single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of Interstate 76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line. Fourteen at-grade railroad/roadway crossing improvement projects would be included. Electric multiple unit commuter rail vehicle technology would be employed with four-car train sets and North Metros eight new stations (plus DUS) would include: National Western Stock Show (Denver), 72nd Avenue South (Commerce City), 88th Avenue (Thornton), 104th Avenue (Thornton), 112th Avenue (Northglenn), 124th Avenue (Thornton), 144th Avenue (Thornton), and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 (Thornton). The 2020 opening day corridor parking supply would be approximately 4,020 spaces. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 with 24,500 riders per weekday in 2035. Opening day capital cost is estimated at $910 million in year of expenditure dollars (2020). POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would connect major activity centers, community resources, and other regional transit services provided by the Regional Transportation District. The preferred alternative would increase mobility in the corridor, provide dependable transit service, and provide an alternative to single-occupant vehicle travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require the acquisition of 121.7 acres and relocation of one residential property and of six businesses. Two acres of wetlands and two acres of other water features would be permanently impacted. Eight parks, 13 recreational trails, one historic site, and two archaeological sites would be affected. With recommended quiet zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, moderate impacts to 180 sites would remain. Multiple hazardous waste sites exist in the project area including 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0443D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110025, Volume I--636 pages, Volume II-- 763 pages, Appendices C, E, F, G and H--CD-ROM, January 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Central Business Districts KW - Cultural Resources KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129894?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 13 of 42] T2 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 873129877; 14781-5_0013 AB - PURPOSE: An 18-mile, high-capacity, fixed-guideway commuter rail transit project from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway 7 (SH 7), serving Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County is proposed. The wedge-shaped North Metro corridor study area includes lower downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. Future population and employment growth in the corridor is expected to increase total vehicle miles travelled by 41 percent between 2007 and 2035 leading to congestion and travel delay. The southern section of the proposed North Metro project would extend from Denver Union Station (DUS) to 84th Avenue, and four alignment options were evaluated to bypass congested Sand Creek Junction. The northern section would extend from 84th Avenue to the SH 7/162nd Avenue area, and one alignment was evaluated. This final EIS compares the preferred build alternative with a No Action Alternative which represents a 2035 horizon-year scenario for the region with no new major transit investment in the North Metro corridor. The preferred alternative would locate the new passenger railway adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Railway Brush Subdivision from the DUS access to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels OBrian Canal to the west, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific Boulder Branch alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area. The majority of the alignment would be single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of Interstate 76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line. Fourteen at-grade railroad/roadway crossing improvement projects would be included. Electric multiple unit commuter rail vehicle technology would be employed with four-car train sets and North Metros eight new stations (plus DUS) would include: National Western Stock Show (Denver), 72nd Avenue South (Commerce City), 88th Avenue (Thornton), 104th Avenue (Thornton), 112th Avenue (Northglenn), 124th Avenue (Thornton), 144th Avenue (Thornton), and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 (Thornton). The 2020 opening day corridor parking supply would be approximately 4,020 spaces. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 with 24,500 riders per weekday in 2035. Opening day capital cost is estimated at $910 million in year of expenditure dollars (2020). POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would connect major activity centers, community resources, and other regional transit services provided by the Regional Transportation District. The preferred alternative would increase mobility in the corridor, provide dependable transit service, and provide an alternative to single-occupant vehicle travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require the acquisition of 121.7 acres and relocation of one residential property and of six businesses. Two acres of wetlands and two acres of other water features would be permanently impacted. Eight parks, 13 recreational trails, one historic site, and two archaeological sites would be affected. With recommended quiet zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, moderate impacts to 180 sites would remain. Multiple hazardous waste sites exist in the project area including 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0443D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110025, Volume I--636 pages, Volume II-- 763 pages, Appendices C, E, F, G and H--CD-ROM, January 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 13 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Central Business Districts KW - Cultural Resources KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129877?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 12 of 42] T2 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 873129863; 14781-5_0012 AB - PURPOSE: An 18-mile, high-capacity, fixed-guideway commuter rail transit project from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway 7 (SH 7), serving Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County is proposed. The wedge-shaped North Metro corridor study area includes lower downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. Future population and employment growth in the corridor is expected to increase total vehicle miles travelled by 41 percent between 2007 and 2035 leading to congestion and travel delay. The southern section of the proposed North Metro project would extend from Denver Union Station (DUS) to 84th Avenue, and four alignment options were evaluated to bypass congested Sand Creek Junction. The northern section would extend from 84th Avenue to the SH 7/162nd Avenue area, and one alignment was evaluated. This final EIS compares the preferred build alternative with a No Action Alternative which represents a 2035 horizon-year scenario for the region with no new major transit investment in the North Metro corridor. The preferred alternative would locate the new passenger railway adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Railway Brush Subdivision from the DUS access to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels OBrian Canal to the west, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific Boulder Branch alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area. The majority of the alignment would be single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of Interstate 76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line. Fourteen at-grade railroad/roadway crossing improvement projects would be included. Electric multiple unit commuter rail vehicle technology would be employed with four-car train sets and North Metros eight new stations (plus DUS) would include: National Western Stock Show (Denver), 72nd Avenue South (Commerce City), 88th Avenue (Thornton), 104th Avenue (Thornton), 112th Avenue (Northglenn), 124th Avenue (Thornton), 144th Avenue (Thornton), and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 (Thornton). The 2020 opening day corridor parking supply would be approximately 4,020 spaces. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 with 24,500 riders per weekday in 2035. Opening day capital cost is estimated at $910 million in year of expenditure dollars (2020). POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would connect major activity centers, community resources, and other regional transit services provided by the Regional Transportation District. The preferred alternative would increase mobility in the corridor, provide dependable transit service, and provide an alternative to single-occupant vehicle travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require the acquisition of 121.7 acres and relocation of one residential property and of six businesses. Two acres of wetlands and two acres of other water features would be permanently impacted. Eight parks, 13 recreational trails, one historic site, and two archaeological sites would be affected. With recommended quiet zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, moderate impacts to 180 sites would remain. Multiple hazardous waste sites exist in the project area including 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0443D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110025, Volume I--636 pages, Volume II-- 763 pages, Appendices C, E, F, G and H--CD-ROM, January 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Central Business Districts KW - Cultural Resources KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129863?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 42 of 42] T2 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 873128723; 14781-5_0042 AB - PURPOSE: An 18-mile, high-capacity, fixed-guideway commuter rail transit project from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway 7 (SH 7), serving Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County is proposed. The wedge-shaped North Metro corridor study area includes lower downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. Future population and employment growth in the corridor is expected to increase total vehicle miles travelled by 41 percent between 2007 and 2035 leading to congestion and travel delay. The southern section of the proposed North Metro project would extend from Denver Union Station (DUS) to 84th Avenue, and four alignment options were evaluated to bypass congested Sand Creek Junction. The northern section would extend from 84th Avenue to the SH 7/162nd Avenue area, and one alignment was evaluated. This final EIS compares the preferred build alternative with a No Action Alternative which represents a 2035 horizon-year scenario for the region with no new major transit investment in the North Metro corridor. The preferred alternative would locate the new passenger railway adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Railway Brush Subdivision from the DUS access to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels OBrian Canal to the west, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific Boulder Branch alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area. The majority of the alignment would be single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of Interstate 76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line. Fourteen at-grade railroad/roadway crossing improvement projects would be included. Electric multiple unit commuter rail vehicle technology would be employed with four-car train sets and North Metros eight new stations (plus DUS) would include: National Western Stock Show (Denver), 72nd Avenue South (Commerce City), 88th Avenue (Thornton), 104th Avenue (Thornton), 112th Avenue (Northglenn), 124th Avenue (Thornton), 144th Avenue (Thornton), and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 (Thornton). The 2020 opening day corridor parking supply would be approximately 4,020 spaces. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 with 24,500 riders per weekday in 2035. Opening day capital cost is estimated at $910 million in year of expenditure dollars (2020). POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would connect major activity centers, community resources, and other regional transit services provided by the Regional Transportation District. The preferred alternative would increase mobility in the corridor, provide dependable transit service, and provide an alternative to single-occupant vehicle travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require the acquisition of 121.7 acres and relocation of one residential property and of six businesses. Two acres of wetlands and two acres of other water features would be permanently impacted. Eight parks, 13 recreational trails, one historic site, and two archaeological sites would be affected. With recommended quiet zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, moderate impacts to 180 sites would remain. Multiple hazardous waste sites exist in the project area including 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0443D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110025, Volume I--636 pages, Volume II-- 763 pages, Appendices C, E, F, G and H--CD-ROM, January 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 42 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Central Business Districts KW - Cultural Resources KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128723?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 41 of 42] T2 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 873128701; 14781-5_0041 AB - PURPOSE: An 18-mile, high-capacity, fixed-guideway commuter rail transit project from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway 7 (SH 7), serving Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County is proposed. The wedge-shaped North Metro corridor study area includes lower downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. Future population and employment growth in the corridor is expected to increase total vehicle miles travelled by 41 percent between 2007 and 2035 leading to congestion and travel delay. The southern section of the proposed North Metro project would extend from Denver Union Station (DUS) to 84th Avenue, and four alignment options were evaluated to bypass congested Sand Creek Junction. The northern section would extend from 84th Avenue to the SH 7/162nd Avenue area, and one alignment was evaluated. This final EIS compares the preferred build alternative with a No Action Alternative which represents a 2035 horizon-year scenario for the region with no new major transit investment in the North Metro corridor. The preferred alternative would locate the new passenger railway adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Railway Brush Subdivision from the DUS access to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels OBrian Canal to the west, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific Boulder Branch alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area. The majority of the alignment would be single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of Interstate 76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line. Fourteen at-grade railroad/roadway crossing improvement projects would be included. Electric multiple unit commuter rail vehicle technology would be employed with four-car train sets and North Metros eight new stations (plus DUS) would include: National Western Stock Show (Denver), 72nd Avenue South (Commerce City), 88th Avenue (Thornton), 104th Avenue (Thornton), 112th Avenue (Northglenn), 124th Avenue (Thornton), 144th Avenue (Thornton), and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 (Thornton). The 2020 opening day corridor parking supply would be approximately 4,020 spaces. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 with 24,500 riders per weekday in 2035. Opening day capital cost is estimated at $910 million in year of expenditure dollars (2020). POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would connect major activity centers, community resources, and other regional transit services provided by the Regional Transportation District. The preferred alternative would increase mobility in the corridor, provide dependable transit service, and provide an alternative to single-occupant vehicle travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require the acquisition of 121.7 acres and relocation of one residential property and of six businesses. Two acres of wetlands and two acres of other water features would be permanently impacted. Eight parks, 13 recreational trails, one historic site, and two archaeological sites would be affected. With recommended quiet zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, moderate impacts to 180 sites would remain. Multiple hazardous waste sites exist in the project area including 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0443D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110025, Volume I--636 pages, Volume II-- 763 pages, Appendices C, E, F, G and H--CD-ROM, January 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 41 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Central Business Districts KW - Cultural Resources KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128701?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 15 of 42] T2 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 873128663; 14781-5_0015 AB - PURPOSE: An 18-mile, high-capacity, fixed-guideway commuter rail transit project from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway 7 (SH 7), serving Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County is proposed. The wedge-shaped North Metro corridor study area includes lower downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. Future population and employment growth in the corridor is expected to increase total vehicle miles travelled by 41 percent between 2007 and 2035 leading to congestion and travel delay. The southern section of the proposed North Metro project would extend from Denver Union Station (DUS) to 84th Avenue, and four alignment options were evaluated to bypass congested Sand Creek Junction. The northern section would extend from 84th Avenue to the SH 7/162nd Avenue area, and one alignment was evaluated. This final EIS compares the preferred build alternative with a No Action Alternative which represents a 2035 horizon-year scenario for the region with no new major transit investment in the North Metro corridor. The preferred alternative would locate the new passenger railway adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Railway Brush Subdivision from the DUS access to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels OBrian Canal to the west, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific Boulder Branch alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area. The majority of the alignment would be single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of Interstate 76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line. Fourteen at-grade railroad/roadway crossing improvement projects would be included. Electric multiple unit commuter rail vehicle technology would be employed with four-car train sets and North Metros eight new stations (plus DUS) would include: National Western Stock Show (Denver), 72nd Avenue South (Commerce City), 88th Avenue (Thornton), 104th Avenue (Thornton), 112th Avenue (Northglenn), 124th Avenue (Thornton), 144th Avenue (Thornton), and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 (Thornton). The 2020 opening day corridor parking supply would be approximately 4,020 spaces. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 with 24,500 riders per weekday in 2035. Opening day capital cost is estimated at $910 million in year of expenditure dollars (2020). POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would connect major activity centers, community resources, and other regional transit services provided by the Regional Transportation District. The preferred alternative would increase mobility in the corridor, provide dependable transit service, and provide an alternative to single-occupant vehicle travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require the acquisition of 121.7 acres and relocation of one residential property and of six businesses. Two acres of wetlands and two acres of other water features would be permanently impacted. Eight parks, 13 recreational trails, one historic site, and two archaeological sites would be affected. With recommended quiet zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, moderate impacts to 180 sites would remain. Multiple hazardous waste sites exist in the project area including 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0443D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110025, Volume I--636 pages, Volume II-- 763 pages, Appendices C, E, F, G and H--CD-ROM, January 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Central Business Districts KW - Cultural Resources KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128663?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 25 of 42] T2 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 873128473; 14781-5_0025 AB - PURPOSE: An 18-mile, high-capacity, fixed-guideway commuter rail transit project from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway 7 (SH 7), serving Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County is proposed. The wedge-shaped North Metro corridor study area includes lower downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. Future population and employment growth in the corridor is expected to increase total vehicle miles travelled by 41 percent between 2007 and 2035 leading to congestion and travel delay. The southern section of the proposed North Metro project would extend from Denver Union Station (DUS) to 84th Avenue, and four alignment options were evaluated to bypass congested Sand Creek Junction. The northern section would extend from 84th Avenue to the SH 7/162nd Avenue area, and one alignment was evaluated. This final EIS compares the preferred build alternative with a No Action Alternative which represents a 2035 horizon-year scenario for the region with no new major transit investment in the North Metro corridor. The preferred alternative would locate the new passenger railway adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Railway Brush Subdivision from the DUS access to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels OBrian Canal to the west, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific Boulder Branch alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area. The majority of the alignment would be single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of Interstate 76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line. Fourteen at-grade railroad/roadway crossing improvement projects would be included. Electric multiple unit commuter rail vehicle technology would be employed with four-car train sets and North Metros eight new stations (plus DUS) would include: National Western Stock Show (Denver), 72nd Avenue South (Commerce City), 88th Avenue (Thornton), 104th Avenue (Thornton), 112th Avenue (Northglenn), 124th Avenue (Thornton), 144th Avenue (Thornton), and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 (Thornton). The 2020 opening day corridor parking supply would be approximately 4,020 spaces. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 with 24,500 riders per weekday in 2035. Opening day capital cost is estimated at $910 million in year of expenditure dollars (2020). POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would connect major activity centers, community resources, and other regional transit services provided by the Regional Transportation District. The preferred alternative would increase mobility in the corridor, provide dependable transit service, and provide an alternative to single-occupant vehicle travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require the acquisition of 121.7 acres and relocation of one residential property and of six businesses. Two acres of wetlands and two acres of other water features would be permanently impacted. Eight parks, 13 recreational trails, one historic site, and two archaeological sites would be affected. With recommended quiet zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, moderate impacts to 180 sites would remain. Multiple hazardous waste sites exist in the project area including 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0443D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110025, Volume I--636 pages, Volume II-- 763 pages, Appendices C, E, F, G and H--CD-ROM, January 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 25 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Central Business Districts KW - Cultural Resources KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128473?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 24 of 42] T2 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 873128452; 14781-5_0024 AB - PURPOSE: An 18-mile, high-capacity, fixed-guideway commuter rail transit project from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway 7 (SH 7), serving Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County is proposed. The wedge-shaped North Metro corridor study area includes lower downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. Future population and employment growth in the corridor is expected to increase total vehicle miles travelled by 41 percent between 2007 and 2035 leading to congestion and travel delay. The southern section of the proposed North Metro project would extend from Denver Union Station (DUS) to 84th Avenue, and four alignment options were evaluated to bypass congested Sand Creek Junction. The northern section would extend from 84th Avenue to the SH 7/162nd Avenue area, and one alignment was evaluated. This final EIS compares the preferred build alternative with a No Action Alternative which represents a 2035 horizon-year scenario for the region with no new major transit investment in the North Metro corridor. The preferred alternative would locate the new passenger railway adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Railway Brush Subdivision from the DUS access to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels OBrian Canal to the west, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific Boulder Branch alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area. The majority of the alignment would be single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of Interstate 76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line. Fourteen at-grade railroad/roadway crossing improvement projects would be included. Electric multiple unit commuter rail vehicle technology would be employed with four-car train sets and North Metros eight new stations (plus DUS) would include: National Western Stock Show (Denver), 72nd Avenue South (Commerce City), 88th Avenue (Thornton), 104th Avenue (Thornton), 112th Avenue (Northglenn), 124th Avenue (Thornton), 144th Avenue (Thornton), and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 (Thornton). The 2020 opening day corridor parking supply would be approximately 4,020 spaces. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 with 24,500 riders per weekday in 2035. Opening day capital cost is estimated at $910 million in year of expenditure dollars (2020). POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would connect major activity centers, community resources, and other regional transit services provided by the Regional Transportation District. The preferred alternative would increase mobility in the corridor, provide dependable transit service, and provide an alternative to single-occupant vehicle travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require the acquisition of 121.7 acres and relocation of one residential property and of six businesses. Two acres of wetlands and two acres of other water features would be permanently impacted. Eight parks, 13 recreational trails, one historic site, and two archaeological sites would be affected. With recommended quiet zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, moderate impacts to 180 sites would remain. Multiple hazardous waste sites exist in the project area including 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0443D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110025, Volume I--636 pages, Volume II-- 763 pages, Appendices C, E, F, G and H--CD-ROM, January 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 24 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Central Business Districts KW - Cultural Resources KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128452?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 23 of 42] T2 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 873128430; 14781-5_0023 AB - PURPOSE: An 18-mile, high-capacity, fixed-guideway commuter rail transit project from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway 7 (SH 7), serving Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County is proposed. The wedge-shaped North Metro corridor study area includes lower downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. Future population and employment growth in the corridor is expected to increase total vehicle miles travelled by 41 percent between 2007 and 2035 leading to congestion and travel delay. The southern section of the proposed North Metro project would extend from Denver Union Station (DUS) to 84th Avenue, and four alignment options were evaluated to bypass congested Sand Creek Junction. The northern section would extend from 84th Avenue to the SH 7/162nd Avenue area, and one alignment was evaluated. This final EIS compares the preferred build alternative with a No Action Alternative which represents a 2035 horizon-year scenario for the region with no new major transit investment in the North Metro corridor. The preferred alternative would locate the new passenger railway adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Railway Brush Subdivision from the DUS access to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels OBrian Canal to the west, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific Boulder Branch alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area. The majority of the alignment would be single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of Interstate 76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line. Fourteen at-grade railroad/roadway crossing improvement projects would be included. Electric multiple unit commuter rail vehicle technology would be employed with four-car train sets and North Metros eight new stations (plus DUS) would include: National Western Stock Show (Denver), 72nd Avenue South (Commerce City), 88th Avenue (Thornton), 104th Avenue (Thornton), 112th Avenue (Northglenn), 124th Avenue (Thornton), 144th Avenue (Thornton), and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 (Thornton). The 2020 opening day corridor parking supply would be approximately 4,020 spaces. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 with 24,500 riders per weekday in 2035. Opening day capital cost is estimated at $910 million in year of expenditure dollars (2020). POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would connect major activity centers, community resources, and other regional transit services provided by the Regional Transportation District. The preferred alternative would increase mobility in the corridor, provide dependable transit service, and provide an alternative to single-occupant vehicle travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require the acquisition of 121.7 acres and relocation of one residential property and of six businesses. Two acres of wetlands and two acres of other water features would be permanently impacted. Eight parks, 13 recreational trails, one historic site, and two archaeological sites would be affected. With recommended quiet zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, moderate impacts to 180 sites would remain. Multiple hazardous waste sites exist in the project area including 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0443D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110025, Volume I--636 pages, Volume II-- 763 pages, Appendices C, E, F, G and H--CD-ROM, January 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 23 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Central Business Districts KW - Cultural Resources KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128430?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 22 of 42] T2 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 873128417; 14781-5_0022 AB - PURPOSE: An 18-mile, high-capacity, fixed-guideway commuter rail transit project from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway 7 (SH 7), serving Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County is proposed. The wedge-shaped North Metro corridor study area includes lower downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. Future population and employment growth in the corridor is expected to increase total vehicle miles travelled by 41 percent between 2007 and 2035 leading to congestion and travel delay. The southern section of the proposed North Metro project would extend from Denver Union Station (DUS) to 84th Avenue, and four alignment options were evaluated to bypass congested Sand Creek Junction. The northern section would extend from 84th Avenue to the SH 7/162nd Avenue area, and one alignment was evaluated. This final EIS compares the preferred build alternative with a No Action Alternative which represents a 2035 horizon-year scenario for the region with no new major transit investment in the North Metro corridor. The preferred alternative would locate the new passenger railway adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Railway Brush Subdivision from the DUS access to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels OBrian Canal to the west, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific Boulder Branch alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area. The majority of the alignment would be single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of Interstate 76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line. Fourteen at-grade railroad/roadway crossing improvement projects would be included. Electric multiple unit commuter rail vehicle technology would be employed with four-car train sets and North Metros eight new stations (plus DUS) would include: National Western Stock Show (Denver), 72nd Avenue South (Commerce City), 88th Avenue (Thornton), 104th Avenue (Thornton), 112th Avenue (Northglenn), 124th Avenue (Thornton), 144th Avenue (Thornton), and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 (Thornton). The 2020 opening day corridor parking supply would be approximately 4,020 spaces. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 with 24,500 riders per weekday in 2035. Opening day capital cost is estimated at $910 million in year of expenditure dollars (2020). POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would connect major activity centers, community resources, and other regional transit services provided by the Regional Transportation District. The preferred alternative would increase mobility in the corridor, provide dependable transit service, and provide an alternative to single-occupant vehicle travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require the acquisition of 121.7 acres and relocation of one residential property and of six businesses. Two acres of wetlands and two acres of other water features would be permanently impacted. Eight parks, 13 recreational trails, one historic site, and two archaeological sites would be affected. With recommended quiet zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, moderate impacts to 180 sites would remain. Multiple hazardous waste sites exist in the project area including 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0443D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110025, Volume I--636 pages, Volume II-- 763 pages, Appendices C, E, F, G and H--CD-ROM, January 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 22 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Central Business Districts KW - Cultural Resources KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128417?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 21 of 42] T2 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 873128411; 14781-5_0021 AB - PURPOSE: An 18-mile, high-capacity, fixed-guideway commuter rail transit project from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway 7 (SH 7), serving Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County is proposed. The wedge-shaped North Metro corridor study area includes lower downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. Future population and employment growth in the corridor is expected to increase total vehicle miles travelled by 41 percent between 2007 and 2035 leading to congestion and travel delay. The southern section of the proposed North Metro project would extend from Denver Union Station (DUS) to 84th Avenue, and four alignment options were evaluated to bypass congested Sand Creek Junction. The northern section would extend from 84th Avenue to the SH 7/162nd Avenue area, and one alignment was evaluated. This final EIS compares the preferred build alternative with a No Action Alternative which represents a 2035 horizon-year scenario for the region with no new major transit investment in the North Metro corridor. The preferred alternative would locate the new passenger railway adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Railway Brush Subdivision from the DUS access to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels OBrian Canal to the west, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific Boulder Branch alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area. The majority of the alignment would be single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of Interstate 76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line. Fourteen at-grade railroad/roadway crossing improvement projects would be included. Electric multiple unit commuter rail vehicle technology would be employed with four-car train sets and North Metros eight new stations (plus DUS) would include: National Western Stock Show (Denver), 72nd Avenue South (Commerce City), 88th Avenue (Thornton), 104th Avenue (Thornton), 112th Avenue (Northglenn), 124th Avenue (Thornton), 144th Avenue (Thornton), and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 (Thornton). The 2020 opening day corridor parking supply would be approximately 4,020 spaces. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 with 24,500 riders per weekday in 2035. Opening day capital cost is estimated at $910 million in year of expenditure dollars (2020). POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would connect major activity centers, community resources, and other regional transit services provided by the Regional Transportation District. The preferred alternative would increase mobility in the corridor, provide dependable transit service, and provide an alternative to single-occupant vehicle travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require the acquisition of 121.7 acres and relocation of one residential property and of six businesses. Two acres of wetlands and two acres of other water features would be permanently impacted. Eight parks, 13 recreational trails, one historic site, and two archaeological sites would be affected. With recommended quiet zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, moderate impacts to 180 sites would remain. Multiple hazardous waste sites exist in the project area including 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0443D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110025, Volume I--636 pages, Volume II-- 763 pages, Appendices C, E, F, G and H--CD-ROM, January 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 21 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Central Business Districts KW - Cultural Resources KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128411?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 5 of 42] T2 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 873128400; 14781-5_0005 AB - PURPOSE: An 18-mile, high-capacity, fixed-guideway commuter rail transit project from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway 7 (SH 7), serving Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County is proposed. The wedge-shaped North Metro corridor study area includes lower downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. Future population and employment growth in the corridor is expected to increase total vehicle miles travelled by 41 percent between 2007 and 2035 leading to congestion and travel delay. The southern section of the proposed North Metro project would extend from Denver Union Station (DUS) to 84th Avenue, and four alignment options were evaluated to bypass congested Sand Creek Junction. The northern section would extend from 84th Avenue to the SH 7/162nd Avenue area, and one alignment was evaluated. This final EIS compares the preferred build alternative with a No Action Alternative which represents a 2035 horizon-year scenario for the region with no new major transit investment in the North Metro corridor. The preferred alternative would locate the new passenger railway adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Railway Brush Subdivision from the DUS access to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels OBrian Canal to the west, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific Boulder Branch alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area. The majority of the alignment would be single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of Interstate 76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line. Fourteen at-grade railroad/roadway crossing improvement projects would be included. Electric multiple unit commuter rail vehicle technology would be employed with four-car train sets and North Metros eight new stations (plus DUS) would include: National Western Stock Show (Denver), 72nd Avenue South (Commerce City), 88th Avenue (Thornton), 104th Avenue (Thornton), 112th Avenue (Northglenn), 124th Avenue (Thornton), 144th Avenue (Thornton), and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 (Thornton). The 2020 opening day corridor parking supply would be approximately 4,020 spaces. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 with 24,500 riders per weekday in 2035. Opening day capital cost is estimated at $910 million in year of expenditure dollars (2020). POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would connect major activity centers, community resources, and other regional transit services provided by the Regional Transportation District. The preferred alternative would increase mobility in the corridor, provide dependable transit service, and provide an alternative to single-occupant vehicle travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require the acquisition of 121.7 acres and relocation of one residential property and of six businesses. Two acres of wetlands and two acres of other water features would be permanently impacted. Eight parks, 13 recreational trails, one historic site, and two archaeological sites would be affected. With recommended quiet zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, moderate impacts to 180 sites would remain. Multiple hazardous waste sites exist in the project area including 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0443D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110025, Volume I--636 pages, Volume II-- 763 pages, Appendices C, E, F, G and H--CD-ROM, January 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Central Business Districts KW - Cultural Resources KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128400?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 4 of 42] T2 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 873128391; 14781-5_0004 AB - PURPOSE: An 18-mile, high-capacity, fixed-guideway commuter rail transit project from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway 7 (SH 7), serving Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County is proposed. The wedge-shaped North Metro corridor study area includes lower downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. Future population and employment growth in the corridor is expected to increase total vehicle miles travelled by 41 percent between 2007 and 2035 leading to congestion and travel delay. The southern section of the proposed North Metro project would extend from Denver Union Station (DUS) to 84th Avenue, and four alignment options were evaluated to bypass congested Sand Creek Junction. The northern section would extend from 84th Avenue to the SH 7/162nd Avenue area, and one alignment was evaluated. This final EIS compares the preferred build alternative with a No Action Alternative which represents a 2035 horizon-year scenario for the region with no new major transit investment in the North Metro corridor. The preferred alternative would locate the new passenger railway adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Railway Brush Subdivision from the DUS access to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels OBrian Canal to the west, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific Boulder Branch alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area. The majority of the alignment would be single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of Interstate 76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line. Fourteen at-grade railroad/roadway crossing improvement projects would be included. Electric multiple unit commuter rail vehicle technology would be employed with four-car train sets and North Metros eight new stations (plus DUS) would include: National Western Stock Show (Denver), 72nd Avenue South (Commerce City), 88th Avenue (Thornton), 104th Avenue (Thornton), 112th Avenue (Northglenn), 124th Avenue (Thornton), 144th Avenue (Thornton), and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 (Thornton). The 2020 opening day corridor parking supply would be approximately 4,020 spaces. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 with 24,500 riders per weekday in 2035. Opening day capital cost is estimated at $910 million in year of expenditure dollars (2020). POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would connect major activity centers, community resources, and other regional transit services provided by the Regional Transportation District. The preferred alternative would increase mobility in the corridor, provide dependable transit service, and provide an alternative to single-occupant vehicle travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require the acquisition of 121.7 acres and relocation of one residential property and of six businesses. Two acres of wetlands and two acres of other water features would be permanently impacted. Eight parks, 13 recreational trails, one historic site, and two archaeological sites would be affected. With recommended quiet zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, moderate impacts to 180 sites would remain. Multiple hazardous waste sites exist in the project area including 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0443D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110025, Volume I--636 pages, Volume II-- 763 pages, Appendices C, E, F, G and H--CD-ROM, January 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Central Business Districts KW - Cultural Resources KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128391?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 3 of 42] T2 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 873128359; 14781-5_0003 AB - PURPOSE: An 18-mile, high-capacity, fixed-guideway commuter rail transit project from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway 7 (SH 7), serving Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County is proposed. The wedge-shaped North Metro corridor study area includes lower downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. Future population and employment growth in the corridor is expected to increase total vehicle miles travelled by 41 percent between 2007 and 2035 leading to congestion and travel delay. The southern section of the proposed North Metro project would extend from Denver Union Station (DUS) to 84th Avenue, and four alignment options were evaluated to bypass congested Sand Creek Junction. The northern section would extend from 84th Avenue to the SH 7/162nd Avenue area, and one alignment was evaluated. This final EIS compares the preferred build alternative with a No Action Alternative which represents a 2035 horizon-year scenario for the region with no new major transit investment in the North Metro corridor. The preferred alternative would locate the new passenger railway adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Railway Brush Subdivision from the DUS access to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels OBrian Canal to the west, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific Boulder Branch alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area. The majority of the alignment would be single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of Interstate 76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line. Fourteen at-grade railroad/roadway crossing improvement projects would be included. Electric multiple unit commuter rail vehicle technology would be employed with four-car train sets and North Metros eight new stations (plus DUS) would include: National Western Stock Show (Denver), 72nd Avenue South (Commerce City), 88th Avenue (Thornton), 104th Avenue (Thornton), 112th Avenue (Northglenn), 124th Avenue (Thornton), 144th Avenue (Thornton), and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 (Thornton). The 2020 opening day corridor parking supply would be approximately 4,020 spaces. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 with 24,500 riders per weekday in 2035. Opening day capital cost is estimated at $910 million in year of expenditure dollars (2020). POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would connect major activity centers, community resources, and other regional transit services provided by the Regional Transportation District. The preferred alternative would increase mobility in the corridor, provide dependable transit service, and provide an alternative to single-occupant vehicle travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require the acquisition of 121.7 acres and relocation of one residential property and of six businesses. Two acres of wetlands and two acres of other water features would be permanently impacted. Eight parks, 13 recreational trails, one historic site, and two archaeological sites would be affected. With recommended quiet zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, moderate impacts to 180 sites would remain. Multiple hazardous waste sites exist in the project area including 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0443D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110025, Volume I--636 pages, Volume II-- 763 pages, Appendices C, E, F, G and H--CD-ROM, January 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Central Business Districts KW - Cultural Resources KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128359?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 2 of 42] T2 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 873128355; 14781-5_0002 AB - PURPOSE: An 18-mile, high-capacity, fixed-guideway commuter rail transit project from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway 7 (SH 7), serving Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County is proposed. The wedge-shaped North Metro corridor study area includes lower downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. Future population and employment growth in the corridor is expected to increase total vehicle miles travelled by 41 percent between 2007 and 2035 leading to congestion and travel delay. The southern section of the proposed North Metro project would extend from Denver Union Station (DUS) to 84th Avenue, and four alignment options were evaluated to bypass congested Sand Creek Junction. The northern section would extend from 84th Avenue to the SH 7/162nd Avenue area, and one alignment was evaluated. This final EIS compares the preferred build alternative with a No Action Alternative which represents a 2035 horizon-year scenario for the region with no new major transit investment in the North Metro corridor. The preferred alternative would locate the new passenger railway adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Railway Brush Subdivision from the DUS access to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels OBrian Canal to the west, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific Boulder Branch alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area. The majority of the alignment would be single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of Interstate 76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line. Fourteen at-grade railroad/roadway crossing improvement projects would be included. Electric multiple unit commuter rail vehicle technology would be employed with four-car train sets and North Metros eight new stations (plus DUS) would include: National Western Stock Show (Denver), 72nd Avenue South (Commerce City), 88th Avenue (Thornton), 104th Avenue (Thornton), 112th Avenue (Northglenn), 124th Avenue (Thornton), 144th Avenue (Thornton), and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 (Thornton). The 2020 opening day corridor parking supply would be approximately 4,020 spaces. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 with 24,500 riders per weekday in 2035. Opening day capital cost is estimated at $910 million in year of expenditure dollars (2020). POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would connect major activity centers, community resources, and other regional transit services provided by the Regional Transportation District. The preferred alternative would increase mobility in the corridor, provide dependable transit service, and provide an alternative to single-occupant vehicle travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require the acquisition of 121.7 acres and relocation of one residential property and of six businesses. Two acres of wetlands and two acres of other water features would be permanently impacted. Eight parks, 13 recreational trails, one historic site, and two archaeological sites would be affected. With recommended quiet zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, moderate impacts to 180 sites would remain. Multiple hazardous waste sites exist in the project area including 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0443D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110025, Volume I--636 pages, Volume II-- 763 pages, Appendices C, E, F, G and H--CD-ROM, January 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Central Business Districts KW - Cultural Resources KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128355?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 1 of 42] T2 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 873128348; 14781-5_0001 AB - PURPOSE: An 18-mile, high-capacity, fixed-guideway commuter rail transit project from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway 7 (SH 7), serving Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County is proposed. The wedge-shaped North Metro corridor study area includes lower downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. Future population and employment growth in the corridor is expected to increase total vehicle miles travelled by 41 percent between 2007 and 2035 leading to congestion and travel delay. The southern section of the proposed North Metro project would extend from Denver Union Station (DUS) to 84th Avenue, and four alignment options were evaluated to bypass congested Sand Creek Junction. The northern section would extend from 84th Avenue to the SH 7/162nd Avenue area, and one alignment was evaluated. This final EIS compares the preferred build alternative with a No Action Alternative which represents a 2035 horizon-year scenario for the region with no new major transit investment in the North Metro corridor. The preferred alternative would locate the new passenger railway adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Railway Brush Subdivision from the DUS access to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels OBrian Canal to the west, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific Boulder Branch alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area. The majority of the alignment would be single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of Interstate 76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line. Fourteen at-grade railroad/roadway crossing improvement projects would be included. Electric multiple unit commuter rail vehicle technology would be employed with four-car train sets and North Metros eight new stations (plus DUS) would include: National Western Stock Show (Denver), 72nd Avenue South (Commerce City), 88th Avenue (Thornton), 104th Avenue (Thornton), 112th Avenue (Northglenn), 124th Avenue (Thornton), 144th Avenue (Thornton), and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 (Thornton). The 2020 opening day corridor parking supply would be approximately 4,020 spaces. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 with 24,500 riders per weekday in 2035. Opening day capital cost is estimated at $910 million in year of expenditure dollars (2020). POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would connect major activity centers, community resources, and other regional transit services provided by the Regional Transportation District. The preferred alternative would increase mobility in the corridor, provide dependable transit service, and provide an alternative to single-occupant vehicle travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require the acquisition of 121.7 acres and relocation of one residential property and of six businesses. Two acres of wetlands and two acres of other water features would be permanently impacted. Eight parks, 13 recreational trails, one historic site, and two archaeological sites would be affected. With recommended quiet zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, moderate impacts to 180 sites would remain. Multiple hazardous waste sites exist in the project area including 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0443D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110025, Volume I--636 pages, Volume II-- 763 pages, Appendices C, E, F, G and H--CD-ROM, January 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Central Business Districts KW - Cultural Resources KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128348?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 8 of 42] T2 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 873127615; 14781-5_0008 AB - PURPOSE: An 18-mile, high-capacity, fixed-guideway commuter rail transit project from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway 7 (SH 7), serving Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County is proposed. The wedge-shaped North Metro corridor study area includes lower downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. Future population and employment growth in the corridor is expected to increase total vehicle miles travelled by 41 percent between 2007 and 2035 leading to congestion and travel delay. The southern section of the proposed North Metro project would extend from Denver Union Station (DUS) to 84th Avenue, and four alignment options were evaluated to bypass congested Sand Creek Junction. The northern section would extend from 84th Avenue to the SH 7/162nd Avenue area, and one alignment was evaluated. This final EIS compares the preferred build alternative with a No Action Alternative which represents a 2035 horizon-year scenario for the region with no new major transit investment in the North Metro corridor. The preferred alternative would locate the new passenger railway adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Railway Brush Subdivision from the DUS access to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels OBrian Canal to the west, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific Boulder Branch alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area. The majority of the alignment would be single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of Interstate 76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line. Fourteen at-grade railroad/roadway crossing improvement projects would be included. Electric multiple unit commuter rail vehicle technology would be employed with four-car train sets and North Metros eight new stations (plus DUS) would include: National Western Stock Show (Denver), 72nd Avenue South (Commerce City), 88th Avenue (Thornton), 104th Avenue (Thornton), 112th Avenue (Northglenn), 124th Avenue (Thornton), 144th Avenue (Thornton), and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 (Thornton). The 2020 opening day corridor parking supply would be approximately 4,020 spaces. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 with 24,500 riders per weekday in 2035. Opening day capital cost is estimated at $910 million in year of expenditure dollars (2020). POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would connect major activity centers, community resources, and other regional transit services provided by the Regional Transportation District. The preferred alternative would increase mobility in the corridor, provide dependable transit service, and provide an alternative to single-occupant vehicle travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require the acquisition of 121.7 acres and relocation of one residential property and of six businesses. Two acres of wetlands and two acres of other water features would be permanently impacted. Eight parks, 13 recreational trails, one historic site, and two archaeological sites would be affected. With recommended quiet zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, moderate impacts to 180 sites would remain. Multiple hazardous waste sites exist in the project area including 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0443D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110025, Volume I--636 pages, Volume II-- 763 pages, Appendices C, E, F, G and H--CD-ROM, January 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Central Business Districts KW - Cultural Resources KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127615?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 7 of 42] T2 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 873127610; 14781-5_0007 AB - PURPOSE: An 18-mile, high-capacity, fixed-guideway commuter rail transit project from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway 7 (SH 7), serving Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County is proposed. The wedge-shaped North Metro corridor study area includes lower downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. Future population and employment growth in the corridor is expected to increase total vehicle miles travelled by 41 percent between 2007 and 2035 leading to congestion and travel delay. The southern section of the proposed North Metro project would extend from Denver Union Station (DUS) to 84th Avenue, and four alignment options were evaluated to bypass congested Sand Creek Junction. The northern section would extend from 84th Avenue to the SH 7/162nd Avenue area, and one alignment was evaluated. This final EIS compares the preferred build alternative with a No Action Alternative which represents a 2035 horizon-year scenario for the region with no new major transit investment in the North Metro corridor. The preferred alternative would locate the new passenger railway adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Railway Brush Subdivision from the DUS access to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels OBrian Canal to the west, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific Boulder Branch alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area. The majority of the alignment would be single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of Interstate 76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line. Fourteen at-grade railroad/roadway crossing improvement projects would be included. Electric multiple unit commuter rail vehicle technology would be employed with four-car train sets and North Metros eight new stations (plus DUS) would include: National Western Stock Show (Denver), 72nd Avenue South (Commerce City), 88th Avenue (Thornton), 104th Avenue (Thornton), 112th Avenue (Northglenn), 124th Avenue (Thornton), 144th Avenue (Thornton), and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 (Thornton). The 2020 opening day corridor parking supply would be approximately 4,020 spaces. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 with 24,500 riders per weekday in 2035. Opening day capital cost is estimated at $910 million in year of expenditure dollars (2020). POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would connect major activity centers, community resources, and other regional transit services provided by the Regional Transportation District. The preferred alternative would increase mobility in the corridor, provide dependable transit service, and provide an alternative to single-occupant vehicle travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require the acquisition of 121.7 acres and relocation of one residential property and of six businesses. Two acres of wetlands and two acres of other water features would be permanently impacted. Eight parks, 13 recreational trails, one historic site, and two archaeological sites would be affected. With recommended quiet zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, moderate impacts to 180 sites would remain. Multiple hazardous waste sites exist in the project area including 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0443D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110025, Volume I--636 pages, Volume II-- 763 pages, Appendices C, E, F, G and H--CD-ROM, January 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Central Business Districts KW - Cultural Resources KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127610?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 40 of 42] T2 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 873127429; 14781-5_0040 AB - PURPOSE: An 18-mile, high-capacity, fixed-guideway commuter rail transit project from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway 7 (SH 7), serving Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County is proposed. The wedge-shaped North Metro corridor study area includes lower downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. Future population and employment growth in the corridor is expected to increase total vehicle miles travelled by 41 percent between 2007 and 2035 leading to congestion and travel delay. The southern section of the proposed North Metro project would extend from Denver Union Station (DUS) to 84th Avenue, and four alignment options were evaluated to bypass congested Sand Creek Junction. The northern section would extend from 84th Avenue to the SH 7/162nd Avenue area, and one alignment was evaluated. This final EIS compares the preferred build alternative with a No Action Alternative which represents a 2035 horizon-year scenario for the region with no new major transit investment in the North Metro corridor. The preferred alternative would locate the new passenger railway adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Railway Brush Subdivision from the DUS access to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels OBrian Canal to the west, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific Boulder Branch alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area. The majority of the alignment would be single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of Interstate 76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line. Fourteen at-grade railroad/roadway crossing improvement projects would be included. Electric multiple unit commuter rail vehicle technology would be employed with four-car train sets and North Metros eight new stations (plus DUS) would include: National Western Stock Show (Denver), 72nd Avenue South (Commerce City), 88th Avenue (Thornton), 104th Avenue (Thornton), 112th Avenue (Northglenn), 124th Avenue (Thornton), 144th Avenue (Thornton), and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 (Thornton). The 2020 opening day corridor parking supply would be approximately 4,020 spaces. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 with 24,500 riders per weekday in 2035. Opening day capital cost is estimated at $910 million in year of expenditure dollars (2020). POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would connect major activity centers, community resources, and other regional transit services provided by the Regional Transportation District. The preferred alternative would increase mobility in the corridor, provide dependable transit service, and provide an alternative to single-occupant vehicle travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require the acquisition of 121.7 acres and relocation of one residential property and of six businesses. Two acres of wetlands and two acres of other water features would be permanently impacted. Eight parks, 13 recreational trails, one historic site, and two archaeological sites would be affected. With recommended quiet zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, moderate impacts to 180 sites would remain. Multiple hazardous waste sites exist in the project area including 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0443D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110025, Volume I--636 pages, Volume II-- 763 pages, Appendices C, E, F, G and H--CD-ROM, January 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 40 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Central Business Districts KW - Cultural Resources KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127429?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 39 of 42] T2 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 873127421; 14781-5_0039 AB - PURPOSE: An 18-mile, high-capacity, fixed-guideway commuter rail transit project from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway 7 (SH 7), serving Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County is proposed. The wedge-shaped North Metro corridor study area includes lower downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. Future population and employment growth in the corridor is expected to increase total vehicle miles travelled by 41 percent between 2007 and 2035 leading to congestion and travel delay. The southern section of the proposed North Metro project would extend from Denver Union Station (DUS) to 84th Avenue, and four alignment options were evaluated to bypass congested Sand Creek Junction. The northern section would extend from 84th Avenue to the SH 7/162nd Avenue area, and one alignment was evaluated. This final EIS compares the preferred build alternative with a No Action Alternative which represents a 2035 horizon-year scenario for the region with no new major transit investment in the North Metro corridor. The preferred alternative would locate the new passenger railway adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Railway Brush Subdivision from the DUS access to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels OBrian Canal to the west, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific Boulder Branch alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area. The majority of the alignment would be single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of Interstate 76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line. Fourteen at-grade railroad/roadway crossing improvement projects would be included. Electric multiple unit commuter rail vehicle technology would be employed with four-car train sets and North Metros eight new stations (plus DUS) would include: National Western Stock Show (Denver), 72nd Avenue South (Commerce City), 88th Avenue (Thornton), 104th Avenue (Thornton), 112th Avenue (Northglenn), 124th Avenue (Thornton), 144th Avenue (Thornton), and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 (Thornton). The 2020 opening day corridor parking supply would be approximately 4,020 spaces. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 with 24,500 riders per weekday in 2035. Opening day capital cost is estimated at $910 million in year of expenditure dollars (2020). POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would connect major activity centers, community resources, and other regional transit services provided by the Regional Transportation District. The preferred alternative would increase mobility in the corridor, provide dependable transit service, and provide an alternative to single-occupant vehicle travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require the acquisition of 121.7 acres and relocation of one residential property and of six businesses. Two acres of wetlands and two acres of other water features would be permanently impacted. Eight parks, 13 recreational trails, one historic site, and two archaeological sites would be affected. With recommended quiet zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, moderate impacts to 180 sites would remain. Multiple hazardous waste sites exist in the project area including 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0443D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110025, Volume I--636 pages, Volume II-- 763 pages, Appendices C, E, F, G and H--CD-ROM, January 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 39 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Central Business Districts KW - Cultural Resources KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127421?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 38 of 42] T2 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 873127413; 14781-5_0038 AB - PURPOSE: An 18-mile, high-capacity, fixed-guideway commuter rail transit project from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway 7 (SH 7), serving Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County is proposed. The wedge-shaped North Metro corridor study area includes lower downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. Future population and employment growth in the corridor is expected to increase total vehicle miles travelled by 41 percent between 2007 and 2035 leading to congestion and travel delay. The southern section of the proposed North Metro project would extend from Denver Union Station (DUS) to 84th Avenue, and four alignment options were evaluated to bypass congested Sand Creek Junction. The northern section would extend from 84th Avenue to the SH 7/162nd Avenue area, and one alignment was evaluated. This final EIS compares the preferred build alternative with a No Action Alternative which represents a 2035 horizon-year scenario for the region with no new major transit investment in the North Metro corridor. The preferred alternative would locate the new passenger railway adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Railway Brush Subdivision from the DUS access to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels OBrian Canal to the west, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific Boulder Branch alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area. The majority of the alignment would be single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of Interstate 76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line. Fourteen at-grade railroad/roadway crossing improvement projects would be included. Electric multiple unit commuter rail vehicle technology would be employed with four-car train sets and North Metros eight new stations (plus DUS) would include: National Western Stock Show (Denver), 72nd Avenue South (Commerce City), 88th Avenue (Thornton), 104th Avenue (Thornton), 112th Avenue (Northglenn), 124th Avenue (Thornton), 144th Avenue (Thornton), and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 (Thornton). The 2020 opening day corridor parking supply would be approximately 4,020 spaces. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 with 24,500 riders per weekday in 2035. Opening day capital cost is estimated at $910 million in year of expenditure dollars (2020). POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would connect major activity centers, community resources, and other regional transit services provided by the Regional Transportation District. The preferred alternative would increase mobility in the corridor, provide dependable transit service, and provide an alternative to single-occupant vehicle travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require the acquisition of 121.7 acres and relocation of one residential property and of six businesses. Two acres of wetlands and two acres of other water features would be permanently impacted. Eight parks, 13 recreational trails, one historic site, and two archaeological sites would be affected. With recommended quiet zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, moderate impacts to 180 sites would remain. Multiple hazardous waste sites exist in the project area including 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0443D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110025, Volume I--636 pages, Volume II-- 763 pages, Appendices C, E, F, G and H--CD-ROM, January 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 38 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Central Business Districts KW - Cultural Resources KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127413?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 37 of 42] T2 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 873127402; 14781-5_0037 AB - PURPOSE: An 18-mile, high-capacity, fixed-guideway commuter rail transit project from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway 7 (SH 7), serving Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County is proposed. The wedge-shaped North Metro corridor study area includes lower downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. Future population and employment growth in the corridor is expected to increase total vehicle miles travelled by 41 percent between 2007 and 2035 leading to congestion and travel delay. The southern section of the proposed North Metro project would extend from Denver Union Station (DUS) to 84th Avenue, and four alignment options were evaluated to bypass congested Sand Creek Junction. The northern section would extend from 84th Avenue to the SH 7/162nd Avenue area, and one alignment was evaluated. This final EIS compares the preferred build alternative with a No Action Alternative which represents a 2035 horizon-year scenario for the region with no new major transit investment in the North Metro corridor. The preferred alternative would locate the new passenger railway adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Railway Brush Subdivision from the DUS access to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels OBrian Canal to the west, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific Boulder Branch alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area. The majority of the alignment would be single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of Interstate 76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line. Fourteen at-grade railroad/roadway crossing improvement projects would be included. Electric multiple unit commuter rail vehicle technology would be employed with four-car train sets and North Metros eight new stations (plus DUS) would include: National Western Stock Show (Denver), 72nd Avenue South (Commerce City), 88th Avenue (Thornton), 104th Avenue (Thornton), 112th Avenue (Northglenn), 124th Avenue (Thornton), 144th Avenue (Thornton), and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 (Thornton). The 2020 opening day corridor parking supply would be approximately 4,020 spaces. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 with 24,500 riders per weekday in 2035. Opening day capital cost is estimated at $910 million in year of expenditure dollars (2020). POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would connect major activity centers, community resources, and other regional transit services provided by the Regional Transportation District. The preferred alternative would increase mobility in the corridor, provide dependable transit service, and provide an alternative to single-occupant vehicle travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require the acquisition of 121.7 acres and relocation of one residential property and of six businesses. Two acres of wetlands and two acres of other water features would be permanently impacted. Eight parks, 13 recreational trails, one historic site, and two archaeological sites would be affected. With recommended quiet zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, moderate impacts to 180 sites would remain. Multiple hazardous waste sites exist in the project area including 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0443D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110025, Volume I--636 pages, Volume II-- 763 pages, Appendices C, E, F, G and H--CD-ROM, January 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 37 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Central Business Districts KW - Cultural Resources KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127402?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 36 of 42] T2 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 873127396; 14781-5_0036 AB - PURPOSE: An 18-mile, high-capacity, fixed-guideway commuter rail transit project from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway 7 (SH 7), serving Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County is proposed. The wedge-shaped North Metro corridor study area includes lower downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. Future population and employment growth in the corridor is expected to increase total vehicle miles travelled by 41 percent between 2007 and 2035 leading to congestion and travel delay. The southern section of the proposed North Metro project would extend from Denver Union Station (DUS) to 84th Avenue, and four alignment options were evaluated to bypass congested Sand Creek Junction. The northern section would extend from 84th Avenue to the SH 7/162nd Avenue area, and one alignment was evaluated. This final EIS compares the preferred build alternative with a No Action Alternative which represents a 2035 horizon-year scenario for the region with no new major transit investment in the North Metro corridor. The preferred alternative would locate the new passenger railway adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Railway Brush Subdivision from the DUS access to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels OBrian Canal to the west, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific Boulder Branch alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area. The majority of the alignment would be single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of Interstate 76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line. Fourteen at-grade railroad/roadway crossing improvement projects would be included. Electric multiple unit commuter rail vehicle technology would be employed with four-car train sets and North Metros eight new stations (plus DUS) would include: National Western Stock Show (Denver), 72nd Avenue South (Commerce City), 88th Avenue (Thornton), 104th Avenue (Thornton), 112th Avenue (Northglenn), 124th Avenue (Thornton), 144th Avenue (Thornton), and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 (Thornton). The 2020 opening day corridor parking supply would be approximately 4,020 spaces. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 with 24,500 riders per weekday in 2035. Opening day capital cost is estimated at $910 million in year of expenditure dollars (2020). POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would connect major activity centers, community resources, and other regional transit services provided by the Regional Transportation District. The preferred alternative would increase mobility in the corridor, provide dependable transit service, and provide an alternative to single-occupant vehicle travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require the acquisition of 121.7 acres and relocation of one residential property and of six businesses. Two acres of wetlands and two acres of other water features would be permanently impacted. Eight parks, 13 recreational trails, one historic site, and two archaeological sites would be affected. With recommended quiet zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, moderate impacts to 180 sites would remain. Multiple hazardous waste sites exist in the project area including 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0443D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110025, Volume I--636 pages, Volume II-- 763 pages, Appendices C, E, F, G and H--CD-ROM, January 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 36 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Central Business Districts KW - Cultural Resources KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127396?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 35 of 42] T2 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 873127389; 14781-5_0035 AB - PURPOSE: An 18-mile, high-capacity, fixed-guideway commuter rail transit project from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway 7 (SH 7), serving Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County is proposed. The wedge-shaped North Metro corridor study area includes lower downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. Future population and employment growth in the corridor is expected to increase total vehicle miles travelled by 41 percent between 2007 and 2035 leading to congestion and travel delay. The southern section of the proposed North Metro project would extend from Denver Union Station (DUS) to 84th Avenue, and four alignment options were evaluated to bypass congested Sand Creek Junction. The northern section would extend from 84th Avenue to the SH 7/162nd Avenue area, and one alignment was evaluated. This final EIS compares the preferred build alternative with a No Action Alternative which represents a 2035 horizon-year scenario for the region with no new major transit investment in the North Metro corridor. The preferred alternative would locate the new passenger railway adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Railway Brush Subdivision from the DUS access to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels OBrian Canal to the west, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific Boulder Branch alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area. The majority of the alignment would be single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of Interstate 76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line. Fourteen at-grade railroad/roadway crossing improvement projects would be included. Electric multiple unit commuter rail vehicle technology would be employed with four-car train sets and North Metros eight new stations (plus DUS) would include: National Western Stock Show (Denver), 72nd Avenue South (Commerce City), 88th Avenue (Thornton), 104th Avenue (Thornton), 112th Avenue (Northglenn), 124th Avenue (Thornton), 144th Avenue (Thornton), and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 (Thornton). The 2020 opening day corridor parking supply would be approximately 4,020 spaces. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 with 24,500 riders per weekday in 2035. Opening day capital cost is estimated at $910 million in year of expenditure dollars (2020). POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would connect major activity centers, community resources, and other regional transit services provided by the Regional Transportation District. The preferred alternative would increase mobility in the corridor, provide dependable transit service, and provide an alternative to single-occupant vehicle travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require the acquisition of 121.7 acres and relocation of one residential property and of six businesses. Two acres of wetlands and two acres of other water features would be permanently impacted. Eight parks, 13 recreational trails, one historic site, and two archaeological sites would be affected. With recommended quiet zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, moderate impacts to 180 sites would remain. Multiple hazardous waste sites exist in the project area including 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0443D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110025, Volume I--636 pages, Volume II-- 763 pages, Appendices C, E, F, G and H--CD-ROM, January 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 35 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Central Business Districts KW - Cultural Resources KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127389?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 34 of 42] T2 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 873127380; 14781-5_0034 AB - PURPOSE: An 18-mile, high-capacity, fixed-guideway commuter rail transit project from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway 7 (SH 7), serving Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County is proposed. The wedge-shaped North Metro corridor study area includes lower downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. Future population and employment growth in the corridor is expected to increase total vehicle miles travelled by 41 percent between 2007 and 2035 leading to congestion and travel delay. The southern section of the proposed North Metro project would extend from Denver Union Station (DUS) to 84th Avenue, and four alignment options were evaluated to bypass congested Sand Creek Junction. The northern section would extend from 84th Avenue to the SH 7/162nd Avenue area, and one alignment was evaluated. This final EIS compares the preferred build alternative with a No Action Alternative which represents a 2035 horizon-year scenario for the region with no new major transit investment in the North Metro corridor. The preferred alternative would locate the new passenger railway adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Railway Brush Subdivision from the DUS access to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels OBrian Canal to the west, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific Boulder Branch alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area. The majority of the alignment would be single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of Interstate 76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line. Fourteen at-grade railroad/roadway crossing improvement projects would be included. Electric multiple unit commuter rail vehicle technology would be employed with four-car train sets and North Metros eight new stations (plus DUS) would include: National Western Stock Show (Denver), 72nd Avenue South (Commerce City), 88th Avenue (Thornton), 104th Avenue (Thornton), 112th Avenue (Northglenn), 124th Avenue (Thornton), 144th Avenue (Thornton), and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 (Thornton). The 2020 opening day corridor parking supply would be approximately 4,020 spaces. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 with 24,500 riders per weekday in 2035. Opening day capital cost is estimated at $910 million in year of expenditure dollars (2020). POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would connect major activity centers, community resources, and other regional transit services provided by the Regional Transportation District. The preferred alternative would increase mobility in the corridor, provide dependable transit service, and provide an alternative to single-occupant vehicle travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require the acquisition of 121.7 acres and relocation of one residential property and of six businesses. Two acres of wetlands and two acres of other water features would be permanently impacted. Eight parks, 13 recreational trails, one historic site, and two archaeological sites would be affected. With recommended quiet zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, moderate impacts to 180 sites would remain. Multiple hazardous waste sites exist in the project area including 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0443D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110025, Volume I--636 pages, Volume II-- 763 pages, Appendices C, E, F, G and H--CD-ROM, January 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 34 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Central Business Districts KW - Cultural Resources KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127380?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 33 of 42] T2 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 873127373; 14781-5_0033 AB - PURPOSE: An 18-mile, high-capacity, fixed-guideway commuter rail transit project from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway 7 (SH 7), serving Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County is proposed. The wedge-shaped North Metro corridor study area includes lower downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. Future population and employment growth in the corridor is expected to increase total vehicle miles travelled by 41 percent between 2007 and 2035 leading to congestion and travel delay. The southern section of the proposed North Metro project would extend from Denver Union Station (DUS) to 84th Avenue, and four alignment options were evaluated to bypass congested Sand Creek Junction. The northern section would extend from 84th Avenue to the SH 7/162nd Avenue area, and one alignment was evaluated. This final EIS compares the preferred build alternative with a No Action Alternative which represents a 2035 horizon-year scenario for the region with no new major transit investment in the North Metro corridor. The preferred alternative would locate the new passenger railway adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Railway Brush Subdivision from the DUS access to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels OBrian Canal to the west, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific Boulder Branch alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area. The majority of the alignment would be single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of Interstate 76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line. Fourteen at-grade railroad/roadway crossing improvement projects would be included. Electric multiple unit commuter rail vehicle technology would be employed with four-car train sets and North Metros eight new stations (plus DUS) would include: National Western Stock Show (Denver), 72nd Avenue South (Commerce City), 88th Avenue (Thornton), 104th Avenue (Thornton), 112th Avenue (Northglenn), 124th Avenue (Thornton), 144th Avenue (Thornton), and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 (Thornton). The 2020 opening day corridor parking supply would be approximately 4,020 spaces. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 with 24,500 riders per weekday in 2035. Opening day capital cost is estimated at $910 million in year of expenditure dollars (2020). POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would connect major activity centers, community resources, and other regional transit services provided by the Regional Transportation District. The preferred alternative would increase mobility in the corridor, provide dependable transit service, and provide an alternative to single-occupant vehicle travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require the acquisition of 121.7 acres and relocation of one residential property and of six businesses. Two acres of wetlands and two acres of other water features would be permanently impacted. Eight parks, 13 recreational trails, one historic site, and two archaeological sites would be affected. With recommended quiet zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, moderate impacts to 180 sites would remain. Multiple hazardous waste sites exist in the project area including 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0443D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110025, Volume I--636 pages, Volume II-- 763 pages, Appendices C, E, F, G and H--CD-ROM, January 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 33 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Central Business Districts KW - Cultural Resources KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127373?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 32 of 42] T2 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 873127367; 14781-5_0032 AB - PURPOSE: An 18-mile, high-capacity, fixed-guideway commuter rail transit project from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway 7 (SH 7), serving Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County is proposed. The wedge-shaped North Metro corridor study area includes lower downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. Future population and employment growth in the corridor is expected to increase total vehicle miles travelled by 41 percent between 2007 and 2035 leading to congestion and travel delay. The southern section of the proposed North Metro project would extend from Denver Union Station (DUS) to 84th Avenue, and four alignment options were evaluated to bypass congested Sand Creek Junction. The northern section would extend from 84th Avenue to the SH 7/162nd Avenue area, and one alignment was evaluated. This final EIS compares the preferred build alternative with a No Action Alternative which represents a 2035 horizon-year scenario for the region with no new major transit investment in the North Metro corridor. The preferred alternative would locate the new passenger railway adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Railway Brush Subdivision from the DUS access to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels OBrian Canal to the west, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific Boulder Branch alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area. The majority of the alignment would be single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of Interstate 76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line. Fourteen at-grade railroad/roadway crossing improvement projects would be included. Electric multiple unit commuter rail vehicle technology would be employed with four-car train sets and North Metros eight new stations (plus DUS) would include: National Western Stock Show (Denver), 72nd Avenue South (Commerce City), 88th Avenue (Thornton), 104th Avenue (Thornton), 112th Avenue (Northglenn), 124th Avenue (Thornton), 144th Avenue (Thornton), and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 (Thornton). The 2020 opening day corridor parking supply would be approximately 4,020 spaces. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 with 24,500 riders per weekday in 2035. Opening day capital cost is estimated at $910 million in year of expenditure dollars (2020). POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would connect major activity centers, community resources, and other regional transit services provided by the Regional Transportation District. The preferred alternative would increase mobility in the corridor, provide dependable transit service, and provide an alternative to single-occupant vehicle travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require the acquisition of 121.7 acres and relocation of one residential property and of six businesses. Two acres of wetlands and two acres of other water features would be permanently impacted. Eight parks, 13 recreational trails, one historic site, and two archaeological sites would be affected. With recommended quiet zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, moderate impacts to 180 sites would remain. Multiple hazardous waste sites exist in the project area including 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0443D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110025, Volume I--636 pages, Volume II-- 763 pages, Appendices C, E, F, G and H--CD-ROM, January 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 32 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Central Business Districts KW - Cultural Resources KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127367?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 31 of 42] T2 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 873127241; 14781-5_0031 AB - PURPOSE: An 18-mile, high-capacity, fixed-guideway commuter rail transit project from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway 7 (SH 7), serving Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County is proposed. The wedge-shaped North Metro corridor study area includes lower downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. Future population and employment growth in the corridor is expected to increase total vehicle miles travelled by 41 percent between 2007 and 2035 leading to congestion and travel delay. The southern section of the proposed North Metro project would extend from Denver Union Station (DUS) to 84th Avenue, and four alignment options were evaluated to bypass congested Sand Creek Junction. The northern section would extend from 84th Avenue to the SH 7/162nd Avenue area, and one alignment was evaluated. This final EIS compares the preferred build alternative with a No Action Alternative which represents a 2035 horizon-year scenario for the region with no new major transit investment in the North Metro corridor. The preferred alternative would locate the new passenger railway adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Railway Brush Subdivision from the DUS access to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels OBrian Canal to the west, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific Boulder Branch alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area. The majority of the alignment would be single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of Interstate 76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line. Fourteen at-grade railroad/roadway crossing improvement projects would be included. Electric multiple unit commuter rail vehicle technology would be employed with four-car train sets and North Metros eight new stations (plus DUS) would include: National Western Stock Show (Denver), 72nd Avenue South (Commerce City), 88th Avenue (Thornton), 104th Avenue (Thornton), 112th Avenue (Northglenn), 124th Avenue (Thornton), 144th Avenue (Thornton), and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 (Thornton). The 2020 opening day corridor parking supply would be approximately 4,020 spaces. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 with 24,500 riders per weekday in 2035. Opening day capital cost is estimated at $910 million in year of expenditure dollars (2020). POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would connect major activity centers, community resources, and other regional transit services provided by the Regional Transportation District. The preferred alternative would increase mobility in the corridor, provide dependable transit service, and provide an alternative to single-occupant vehicle travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require the acquisition of 121.7 acres and relocation of one residential property and of six businesses. Two acres of wetlands and two acres of other water features would be permanently impacted. Eight parks, 13 recreational trails, one historic site, and two archaeological sites would be affected. With recommended quiet zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, moderate impacts to 180 sites would remain. Multiple hazardous waste sites exist in the project area including 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0443D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110025, Volume I--636 pages, Volume II-- 763 pages, Appendices C, E, F, G and H--CD-ROM, January 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 31 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Central Business Districts KW - Cultural Resources KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127241?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 11 of 42] T2 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 873127235; 14781-5_0011 AB - PURPOSE: An 18-mile, high-capacity, fixed-guideway commuter rail transit project from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway 7 (SH 7), serving Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County is proposed. The wedge-shaped North Metro corridor study area includes lower downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. Future population and employment growth in the corridor is expected to increase total vehicle miles travelled by 41 percent between 2007 and 2035 leading to congestion and travel delay. The southern section of the proposed North Metro project would extend from Denver Union Station (DUS) to 84th Avenue, and four alignment options were evaluated to bypass congested Sand Creek Junction. The northern section would extend from 84th Avenue to the SH 7/162nd Avenue area, and one alignment was evaluated. This final EIS compares the preferred build alternative with a No Action Alternative which represents a 2035 horizon-year scenario for the region with no new major transit investment in the North Metro corridor. The preferred alternative would locate the new passenger railway adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Railway Brush Subdivision from the DUS access to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels OBrian Canal to the west, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific Boulder Branch alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area. The majority of the alignment would be single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of Interstate 76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line. Fourteen at-grade railroad/roadway crossing improvement projects would be included. Electric multiple unit commuter rail vehicle technology would be employed with four-car train sets and North Metros eight new stations (plus DUS) would include: National Western Stock Show (Denver), 72nd Avenue South (Commerce City), 88th Avenue (Thornton), 104th Avenue (Thornton), 112th Avenue (Northglenn), 124th Avenue (Thornton), 144th Avenue (Thornton), and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 (Thornton). The 2020 opening day corridor parking supply would be approximately 4,020 spaces. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 with 24,500 riders per weekday in 2035. Opening day capital cost is estimated at $910 million in year of expenditure dollars (2020). POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would connect major activity centers, community resources, and other regional transit services provided by the Regional Transportation District. The preferred alternative would increase mobility in the corridor, provide dependable transit service, and provide an alternative to single-occupant vehicle travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require the acquisition of 121.7 acres and relocation of one residential property and of six businesses. Two acres of wetlands and two acres of other water features would be permanently impacted. Eight parks, 13 recreational trails, one historic site, and two archaeological sites would be affected. With recommended quiet zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, moderate impacts to 180 sites would remain. Multiple hazardous waste sites exist in the project area including 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0443D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110025, Volume I--636 pages, Volume II-- 763 pages, Appendices C, E, F, G and H--CD-ROM, January 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Central Business Districts KW - Cultural Resources KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127235?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 10 of 42] T2 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 873127229; 14781-5_0010 AB - PURPOSE: An 18-mile, high-capacity, fixed-guideway commuter rail transit project from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway 7 (SH 7), serving Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County is proposed. The wedge-shaped North Metro corridor study area includes lower downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. Future population and employment growth in the corridor is expected to increase total vehicle miles travelled by 41 percent between 2007 and 2035 leading to congestion and travel delay. The southern section of the proposed North Metro project would extend from Denver Union Station (DUS) to 84th Avenue, and four alignment options were evaluated to bypass congested Sand Creek Junction. The northern section would extend from 84th Avenue to the SH 7/162nd Avenue area, and one alignment was evaluated. This final EIS compares the preferred build alternative with a No Action Alternative which represents a 2035 horizon-year scenario for the region with no new major transit investment in the North Metro corridor. The preferred alternative would locate the new passenger railway adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Railway Brush Subdivision from the DUS access to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels OBrian Canal to the west, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific Boulder Branch alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area. The majority of the alignment would be single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of Interstate 76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line. Fourteen at-grade railroad/roadway crossing improvement projects would be included. Electric multiple unit commuter rail vehicle technology would be employed with four-car train sets and North Metros eight new stations (plus DUS) would include: National Western Stock Show (Denver), 72nd Avenue South (Commerce City), 88th Avenue (Thornton), 104th Avenue (Thornton), 112th Avenue (Northglenn), 124th Avenue (Thornton), 144th Avenue (Thornton), and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 (Thornton). The 2020 opening day corridor parking supply would be approximately 4,020 spaces. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 with 24,500 riders per weekday in 2035. Opening day capital cost is estimated at $910 million in year of expenditure dollars (2020). POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would connect major activity centers, community resources, and other regional transit services provided by the Regional Transportation District. The preferred alternative would increase mobility in the corridor, provide dependable transit service, and provide an alternative to single-occupant vehicle travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require the acquisition of 121.7 acres and relocation of one residential property and of six businesses. Two acres of wetlands and two acres of other water features would be permanently impacted. Eight parks, 13 recreational trails, one historic site, and two archaeological sites would be affected. With recommended quiet zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, moderate impacts to 180 sites would remain. Multiple hazardous waste sites exist in the project area including 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0443D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110025, Volume I--636 pages, Volume II-- 763 pages, Appendices C, E, F, G and H--CD-ROM, January 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Central Business Districts KW - Cultural Resources KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127229?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 9 of 42] T2 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 873127225; 14781-5_0009 AB - PURPOSE: An 18-mile, high-capacity, fixed-guideway commuter rail transit project from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway 7 (SH 7), serving Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County is proposed. The wedge-shaped North Metro corridor study area includes lower downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. Future population and employment growth in the corridor is expected to increase total vehicle miles travelled by 41 percent between 2007 and 2035 leading to congestion and travel delay. The southern section of the proposed North Metro project would extend from Denver Union Station (DUS) to 84th Avenue, and four alignment options were evaluated to bypass congested Sand Creek Junction. The northern section would extend from 84th Avenue to the SH 7/162nd Avenue area, and one alignment was evaluated. This final EIS compares the preferred build alternative with a No Action Alternative which represents a 2035 horizon-year scenario for the region with no new major transit investment in the North Metro corridor. The preferred alternative would locate the new passenger railway adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Railway Brush Subdivision from the DUS access to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels OBrian Canal to the west, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific Boulder Branch alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area. The majority of the alignment would be single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of Interstate 76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line. Fourteen at-grade railroad/roadway crossing improvement projects would be included. Electric multiple unit commuter rail vehicle technology would be employed with four-car train sets and North Metros eight new stations (plus DUS) would include: National Western Stock Show (Denver), 72nd Avenue South (Commerce City), 88th Avenue (Thornton), 104th Avenue (Thornton), 112th Avenue (Northglenn), 124th Avenue (Thornton), 144th Avenue (Thornton), and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 (Thornton). The 2020 opening day corridor parking supply would be approximately 4,020 spaces. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 with 24,500 riders per weekday in 2035. Opening day capital cost is estimated at $910 million in year of expenditure dollars (2020). POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would connect major activity centers, community resources, and other regional transit services provided by the Regional Transportation District. The preferred alternative would increase mobility in the corridor, provide dependable transit service, and provide an alternative to single-occupant vehicle travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require the acquisition of 121.7 acres and relocation of one residential property and of six businesses. Two acres of wetlands and two acres of other water features would be permanently impacted. Eight parks, 13 recreational trails, one historic site, and two archaeological sites would be affected. With recommended quiet zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, moderate impacts to 180 sites would remain. Multiple hazardous waste sites exist in the project area including 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0443D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110025, Volume I--636 pages, Volume II-- 763 pages, Appendices C, E, F, G and H--CD-ROM, January 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Central Business Districts KW - Cultural Resources KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127225?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH METRO CORRIDOR PROJECT, DENVER, COMMERCE CITY, THORNTON, NORTHGLENN, AND ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 855180045; 14781 AB - PURPOSE: An 18-mile, high-capacity, fixed-guideway commuter rail transit project from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway 7 (SH 7), serving Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County is proposed. The wedge-shaped North Metro corridor study area includes lower downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. Future population and employment growth in the corridor is expected to increase total vehicle miles travelled by 41 percent between 2007 and 2035 leading to congestion and travel delay. The southern section of the proposed North Metro project would extend from Denver Union Station (DUS) to 84th Avenue, and four alignment options were evaluated to bypass congested Sand Creek Junction. The northern section would extend from 84th Avenue to the SH 7/162nd Avenue area, and one alignment was evaluated. This final EIS compares the preferred build alternative with a No Action Alternative which represents a 2035 horizon-year scenario for the region with no new major transit investment in the North Metro corridor. The preferred alternative would locate the new passenger railway adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Railway Brush Subdivision from the DUS access to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels OBrian Canal to the west, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific Boulder Branch alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area. The majority of the alignment would be single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of Interstate 76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line. Fourteen at-grade railroad/roadway crossing improvement projects would be included. Electric multiple unit commuter rail vehicle technology would be employed with four-car train sets and North Metros eight new stations (plus DUS) would include: National Western Stock Show (Denver), 72nd Avenue South (Commerce City), 88th Avenue (Thornton), 104th Avenue (Thornton), 112th Avenue (Northglenn), 124th Avenue (Thornton), 144th Avenue (Thornton), and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 (Thornton). The 2020 opening day corridor parking supply would be approximately 4,020 spaces. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue/SH 7 with 24,500 riders per weekday in 2035. Opening day capital cost is estimated at $910 million in year of expenditure dollars (2020). POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would connect major activity centers, community resources, and other regional transit services provided by the Regional Transportation District. The preferred alternative would increase mobility in the corridor, provide dependable transit service, and provide an alternative to single-occupant vehicle travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require the acquisition of 121.7 acres and relocation of one residential property and of six businesses. Two acres of wetlands and two acres of other water features would be permanently impacted. Eight parks, 13 recreational trails, one historic site, and two archaeological sites would be affected. With recommended quiet zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, moderate impacts to 180 sites would remain. Multiple hazardous waste sites exist in the project area including 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0443D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110025, Volume I--636 pages, Volume II-- 763 pages, Appendices C, E, F, G and H--CD-ROM, January 21, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Central Business Districts KW - Cultural Resources KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/855180045?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+METRO+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DENVER%2C+COMMERCE+CITY%2C+THORNTON%2C+NORTHGLENN%2C+AND+ADAMS+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WOODWARD AVENUE LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY OF DETROIT, WAYNE COUNTY, MICHIGAN. [Part 2 of 2] T2 - WOODWARD AVENUE LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY OF DETROIT, WAYNE COUNTY, MICHIGAN. AN - 873128300; 14772-6_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of the Woodward Avenue Light Rail Transit (LRT) Project in Detroit, Michigan are proposed. The study area is located in Wayne County and comprises the Woodward Avenue corridor extending 9.3 miles from downtown Detroit (Downtown), near the Detroit River, north to the State Fairground near 8 Mile Road, and including approximately one-half mile to the east and west of Woodward Avenue. The majority of the study area lies within the city of Detroit, while approximately two miles is within the city of Highland Park. A heavily transit-dependent population along the corridor currently experiences overcrowding, reliability issues, and lack of rapid transit alternatives with the current bus system. Three locally preferred alternatives (LPAs) and a No Build Alternative are evaluated in this draft EIS. Under the LPAs, an at-grade LRT system would be constructed entirely within existing rights-of-way on Woodward Avenue from Downtown to 8 Mile Road; it would be fully functional as a stand-alone project but would be designed to accommodate possible future extensions. The combination of two mainline alignment operating options and three Downtown design options, resulted in three variations of the LPA: median-running Alternative A1 with 15 LRT stations; and curb-running Alternatives B2 and B3 with 21 and 18 LRT stations, respectively. Ancillary facilities associated with the LPA would include: a vehicle storage maintenance facility (VSMF), for which three potential sites are evaluated; a park and ride lot to be located near the proposed Shoppes at Gateway site at the southeast corner of 8 Mile Road and Woodward Avenue; and traction power substations (eight with Alternatives A1 and B2, seven with Alternative B3) dispersed along the length of the LPA. Under Alternative A1, stations would have a conventional canopy over a platform, while Alternatives B2 and B3 could include stations with a roof-mounted square billboard structure extending ten feet above the canopy. The overhead electrical system would include overhead wires used to power the LRT vehicles and poles to support the wires 17 to 22 feet above the street. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve public transit capacity and provide greater mobility options for the Woodward Avenue corridor. Transportation equity would be improved among all travelers. LRT would encourage new development near stations and could encourage infill redevelopment of underutilized or vacant parcels. Economic development opportunities in the northern part of the study area would be enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction and utility relocations would disrupt traffic and pedestrian travel patterns. Alternatives A1, B2 and B3 would result in an adverse effect to 13, 18, and 15 historic properties, respectively. Alternatives A1, B2 and B3 would result in noise impacts on five, six and five noise-sensitive properties, respectively. These impacts would be mitigated with the use of custom-designed LRT vehicle wheel skirts. Impacts to visual continuity in some neighborhoods from curbside LRT stations vertical elements would occur under alternatives B2 and B3. The MLK Boulevard site for the VSMF would have 24-hour light and noise impacts to nearby residences. Hazardous materials are present on each of the three potential VSMF sites and one or more contaminated sites exist near almost all proposed LRT stations. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110016, Draft EIS and Appendices--176 pages and maps, Technical Reports--CD-ROM, January 19, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Central Business Districts KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Urban Development KW - Urban Renewal KW - Michigan KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128300?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WOODWARD+AVENUE+LIGHT+RAIL+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+OF+DETROIT%2C+WAYNE+COUNTY%2C+MICHIGAN.&rft.title=WOODWARD+AVENUE+LIGHT+RAIL+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+OF+DETROIT%2C+WAYNE+COUNTY%2C+MICHIGAN.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 19, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WOODWARD AVENUE LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY OF DETROIT, WAYNE COUNTY, MICHIGAN. [Part 1 of 2] T2 - WOODWARD AVENUE LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY OF DETROIT, WAYNE COUNTY, MICHIGAN. AN - 873128294; 14772-6_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of the Woodward Avenue Light Rail Transit (LRT) Project in Detroit, Michigan are proposed. The study area is located in Wayne County and comprises the Woodward Avenue corridor extending 9.3 miles from downtown Detroit (Downtown), near the Detroit River, north to the State Fairground near 8 Mile Road, and including approximately one-half mile to the east and west of Woodward Avenue. The majority of the study area lies within the city of Detroit, while approximately two miles is within the city of Highland Park. A heavily transit-dependent population along the corridor currently experiences overcrowding, reliability issues, and lack of rapid transit alternatives with the current bus system. Three locally preferred alternatives (LPAs) and a No Build Alternative are evaluated in this draft EIS. Under the LPAs, an at-grade LRT system would be constructed entirely within existing rights-of-way on Woodward Avenue from Downtown to 8 Mile Road; it would be fully functional as a stand-alone project but would be designed to accommodate possible future extensions. The combination of two mainline alignment operating options and three Downtown design options, resulted in three variations of the LPA: median-running Alternative A1 with 15 LRT stations; and curb-running Alternatives B2 and B3 with 21 and 18 LRT stations, respectively. Ancillary facilities associated with the LPA would include: a vehicle storage maintenance facility (VSMF), for which three potential sites are evaluated; a park and ride lot to be located near the proposed Shoppes at Gateway site at the southeast corner of 8 Mile Road and Woodward Avenue; and traction power substations (eight with Alternatives A1 and B2, seven with Alternative B3) dispersed along the length of the LPA. Under Alternative A1, stations would have a conventional canopy over a platform, while Alternatives B2 and B3 could include stations with a roof-mounted square billboard structure extending ten feet above the canopy. The overhead electrical system would include overhead wires used to power the LRT vehicles and poles to support the wires 17 to 22 feet above the street. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve public transit capacity and provide greater mobility options for the Woodward Avenue corridor. Transportation equity would be improved among all travelers. LRT would encourage new development near stations and could encourage infill redevelopment of underutilized or vacant parcels. Economic development opportunities in the northern part of the study area would be enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction and utility relocations would disrupt traffic and pedestrian travel patterns. Alternatives A1, B2 and B3 would result in an adverse effect to 13, 18, and 15 historic properties, respectively. Alternatives A1, B2 and B3 would result in noise impacts on five, six and five noise-sensitive properties, respectively. These impacts would be mitigated with the use of custom-designed LRT vehicle wheel skirts. Impacts to visual continuity in some neighborhoods from curbside LRT stations vertical elements would occur under alternatives B2 and B3. The MLK Boulevard site for the VSMF would have 24-hour light and noise impacts to nearby residences. Hazardous materials are present on each of the three potential VSMF sites and one or more contaminated sites exist near almost all proposed LRT stations. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110016, Draft EIS and Appendices--176 pages and maps, Technical Reports--CD-ROM, January 19, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Central Business Districts KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Urban Development KW - Urban Renewal KW - Michigan KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128294?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WOODWARD+AVENUE+LIGHT+RAIL+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+OF+DETROIT%2C+WAYNE+COUNTY%2C+MICHIGAN.&rft.title=WOODWARD+AVENUE+LIGHT+RAIL+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+OF+DETROIT%2C+WAYNE+COUNTY%2C+MICHIGAN.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 19, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WOODWARD AVENUE LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY OF DETROIT, WAYNE COUNTY, MICHIGAN. AN - 855180068; 14772 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of the Woodward Avenue Light Rail Transit (LRT) Project in Detroit, Michigan are proposed. The study area is located in Wayne County and comprises the Woodward Avenue corridor extending 9.3 miles from downtown Detroit (Downtown), near the Detroit River, north to the State Fairground near 8 Mile Road, and including approximately one-half mile to the east and west of Woodward Avenue. The majority of the study area lies within the city of Detroit, while approximately two miles is within the city of Highland Park. A heavily transit-dependent population along the corridor currently experiences overcrowding, reliability issues, and lack of rapid transit alternatives with the current bus system. Three locally preferred alternatives (LPAs) and a No Build Alternative are evaluated in this draft EIS. Under the LPAs, an at-grade LRT system would be constructed entirely within existing rights-of-way on Woodward Avenue from Downtown to 8 Mile Road; it would be fully functional as a stand-alone project but would be designed to accommodate possible future extensions. The combination of two mainline alignment operating options and three Downtown design options, resulted in three variations of the LPA: median-running Alternative A1 with 15 LRT stations; and curb-running Alternatives B2 and B3 with 21 and 18 LRT stations, respectively. Ancillary facilities associated with the LPA would include: a vehicle storage maintenance facility (VSMF), for which three potential sites are evaluated; a park and ride lot to be located near the proposed Shoppes at Gateway site at the southeast corner of 8 Mile Road and Woodward Avenue; and traction power substations (eight with Alternatives A1 and B2, seven with Alternative B3) dispersed along the length of the LPA. Under Alternative A1, stations would have a conventional canopy over a platform, while Alternatives B2 and B3 could include stations with a roof-mounted square billboard structure extending ten feet above the canopy. The overhead electrical system would include overhead wires used to power the LRT vehicles and poles to support the wires 17 to 22 feet above the street. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve public transit capacity and provide greater mobility options for the Woodward Avenue corridor. Transportation equity would be improved among all travelers. LRT would encourage new development near stations and could encourage infill redevelopment of underutilized or vacant parcels. Economic development opportunities in the northern part of the study area would be enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction and utility relocations would disrupt traffic and pedestrian travel patterns. Alternatives A1, B2 and B3 would result in an adverse effect to 13, 18, and 15 historic properties, respectively. Alternatives A1, B2 and B3 would result in noise impacts on five, six and five noise-sensitive properties, respectively. These impacts would be mitigated with the use of custom-designed LRT vehicle wheel skirts. Impacts to visual continuity in some neighborhoods from curbside LRT stations vertical elements would occur under alternatives B2 and B3. The MLK Boulevard site for the VSMF would have 24-hour light and noise impacts to nearby residences. Hazardous materials are present on each of the three potential VSMF sites and one or more contaminated sites exist near almost all proposed LRT stations. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110016, Draft EIS and Appendices--176 pages and maps, Technical Reports--CD-ROM, January 19, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Central Business Districts KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Urban Development KW - Urban Renewal KW - Michigan KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/855180068?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WOODWARD+AVENUE+LIGHT+RAIL+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+OF+DETROIT%2C+WAYNE+COUNTY%2C+MICHIGAN.&rft.title=WOODWARD+AVENUE+LIGHT+RAIL+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+OF+DETROIT%2C+WAYNE+COUNTY%2C+MICHIGAN.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 19, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 29 of 29] T2 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873129648; 14767-1_0029 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll road extending 22 miles from I-85 west of Gastonia in Gaston County to I-485, near the Charlotte-Douglas International Airport, in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The project is known both as the Gaston East-West Connector and as the Garden Parkway. Limited crossings of the Catawba River constrain travel between Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties; and within southern Gaston County, south of I-85, a lack of connecting east-west roadways makes travel circuitous and limits mobility. Congestion and frequent incidents on I-85 inhibit regional travel and diminish the ability of I-85 to function as a strategic highway corridor and intrastate corridor. Projected growth in southern Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County would further increase demand for accessibility and connectivity between the two counties. Twelve new location detailed study alternatives (DSAs) and a No-Build Alternative are evaluated in this condensed final EIS. The preferred alternative (DSA 9) would have four 12-foot travel lanes, with a 50-foot median and 12-foot paved inside and outside shoulders. The typical right-of-way would be approximately 280 feet, with additional right-of-way required for interchanges, service roads, and improvements to intersecting roads. In addition, between NC 273 (Southpoint Road) and I-485, there would be an auxiliary lane in each direction. Although not part of the ultimate project, if a fifth and sixth lane are needed in the future, they would be constructed to the inside, resulting in a 26-foot paved median. From west to east, interchanges would be located at I-85, US 29-74, Linwood Road (SR 1133), US 321, Robinson Road (SR 2416), NC 274 (Union Road), NC 279 (South New Hope Road), NC 273 (Southpoint Road), Dixie River Road (SR-1155), and I-485. An interchange at Bud Wilson Road (SR-2423) was proposed for all DSAs in the draft EIS, but was eliminated as part of the preferred alternative. The project would include mainline bridge crossings of Blackwood Creek, an unnamed tributary to Crowders Creek located just east of US 321, Catawba Creek, South Fork Catawba River, and Catawba River. Design refinements to the preferred alternative incorporated since the draft EIS was prepared include modifications to improve access to neighborhoods, reduce impacts, and maintain local connectivity. The mainline design speed is 70 miles per hour (mph), with a planned posted speed limit of 65 mph. Tolls would be collected by an electronic toll collection system that would involve pre-registration and use of a transponder/receiver system that would allow vehicles to move through the toll-collection locations at highway speeds. There would be no cash toll booths. For travelers who do not have a transponder, a video system would capture license plate information and the vehicles registrant would be billed. Total cost of implementing the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.28 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Gaston East-West Connector would improve east-west transportation mobility in the area around the City of Gastonia, between Gastonia and the Charlotte metropolitan area, and particularly to establish direct access between the rapidly growing areas of southeast Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 882 acres of upland forest, 4.1 acres of ponds, 7.5 acres of wetlands, and 38,894 linear feet of perennial streams. Highway right-of-way would cross 91 streams and convert 1,084 acres of prime and important farmland. Destruction of natural communities along the right-of-way would result in the loss of foraging and breeding habitats for various animal species. Right-of-way acquisition would impact 25 neighborhoods and require 348 residential relocations and 37 business relocations. Traffic noise would impact 245 receptors. Construction workers could encounter 21 to 24 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0466D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110011, Volume 1 (Final EIS and Appendices A, C-K)--343 pages, Volume 2 (Appendix B, Responses to Comments)--649 pages, Draft EIS and Additional Reports--CD-ROM, January 10, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 29 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-02-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Community Facilities KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Soils Surveys KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129648?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 10, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 28 of 29] T2 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873129638; 14767-1_0028 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll road extending 22 miles from I-85 west of Gastonia in Gaston County to I-485, near the Charlotte-Douglas International Airport, in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The project is known both as the Gaston East-West Connector and as the Garden Parkway. Limited crossings of the Catawba River constrain travel between Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties; and within southern Gaston County, south of I-85, a lack of connecting east-west roadways makes travel circuitous and limits mobility. Congestion and frequent incidents on I-85 inhibit regional travel and diminish the ability of I-85 to function as a strategic highway corridor and intrastate corridor. Projected growth in southern Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County would further increase demand for accessibility and connectivity between the two counties. Twelve new location detailed study alternatives (DSAs) and a No-Build Alternative are evaluated in this condensed final EIS. The preferred alternative (DSA 9) would have four 12-foot travel lanes, with a 50-foot median and 12-foot paved inside and outside shoulders. The typical right-of-way would be approximately 280 feet, with additional right-of-way required for interchanges, service roads, and improvements to intersecting roads. In addition, between NC 273 (Southpoint Road) and I-485, there would be an auxiliary lane in each direction. Although not part of the ultimate project, if a fifth and sixth lane are needed in the future, they would be constructed to the inside, resulting in a 26-foot paved median. From west to east, interchanges would be located at I-85, US 29-74, Linwood Road (SR 1133), US 321, Robinson Road (SR 2416), NC 274 (Union Road), NC 279 (South New Hope Road), NC 273 (Southpoint Road), Dixie River Road (SR-1155), and I-485. An interchange at Bud Wilson Road (SR-2423) was proposed for all DSAs in the draft EIS, but was eliminated as part of the preferred alternative. The project would include mainline bridge crossings of Blackwood Creek, an unnamed tributary to Crowders Creek located just east of US 321, Catawba Creek, South Fork Catawba River, and Catawba River. Design refinements to the preferred alternative incorporated since the draft EIS was prepared include modifications to improve access to neighborhoods, reduce impacts, and maintain local connectivity. The mainline design speed is 70 miles per hour (mph), with a planned posted speed limit of 65 mph. Tolls would be collected by an electronic toll collection system that would involve pre-registration and use of a transponder/receiver system that would allow vehicles to move through the toll-collection locations at highway speeds. There would be no cash toll booths. For travelers who do not have a transponder, a video system would capture license plate information and the vehicles registrant would be billed. Total cost of implementing the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.28 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Gaston East-West Connector would improve east-west transportation mobility in the area around the City of Gastonia, between Gastonia and the Charlotte metropolitan area, and particularly to establish direct access between the rapidly growing areas of southeast Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 882 acres of upland forest, 4.1 acres of ponds, 7.5 acres of wetlands, and 38,894 linear feet of perennial streams. Highway right-of-way would cross 91 streams and convert 1,084 acres of prime and important farmland. Destruction of natural communities along the right-of-way would result in the loss of foraging and breeding habitats for various animal species. Right-of-way acquisition would impact 25 neighborhoods and require 348 residential relocations and 37 business relocations. Traffic noise would impact 245 receptors. Construction workers could encounter 21 to 24 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0466D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110011, Volume 1 (Final EIS and Appendices A, C-K)--343 pages, Volume 2 (Appendix B, Responses to Comments)--649 pages, Draft EIS and Additional Reports--CD-ROM, January 10, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 28 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-02-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Community Facilities KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Soils Surveys KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129638?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 10, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 27 of 29] T2 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873129609; 14767-1_0027 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll road extending 22 miles from I-85 west of Gastonia in Gaston County to I-485, near the Charlotte-Douglas International Airport, in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The project is known both as the Gaston East-West Connector and as the Garden Parkway. Limited crossings of the Catawba River constrain travel between Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties; and within southern Gaston County, south of I-85, a lack of connecting east-west roadways makes travel circuitous and limits mobility. Congestion and frequent incidents on I-85 inhibit regional travel and diminish the ability of I-85 to function as a strategic highway corridor and intrastate corridor. Projected growth in southern Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County would further increase demand for accessibility and connectivity between the two counties. Twelve new location detailed study alternatives (DSAs) and a No-Build Alternative are evaluated in this condensed final EIS. The preferred alternative (DSA 9) would have four 12-foot travel lanes, with a 50-foot median and 12-foot paved inside and outside shoulders. The typical right-of-way would be approximately 280 feet, with additional right-of-way required for interchanges, service roads, and improvements to intersecting roads. In addition, between NC 273 (Southpoint Road) and I-485, there would be an auxiliary lane in each direction. Although not part of the ultimate project, if a fifth and sixth lane are needed in the future, they would be constructed to the inside, resulting in a 26-foot paved median. From west to east, interchanges would be located at I-85, US 29-74, Linwood Road (SR 1133), US 321, Robinson Road (SR 2416), NC 274 (Union Road), NC 279 (South New Hope Road), NC 273 (Southpoint Road), Dixie River Road (SR-1155), and I-485. An interchange at Bud Wilson Road (SR-2423) was proposed for all DSAs in the draft EIS, but was eliminated as part of the preferred alternative. The project would include mainline bridge crossings of Blackwood Creek, an unnamed tributary to Crowders Creek located just east of US 321, Catawba Creek, South Fork Catawba River, and Catawba River. Design refinements to the preferred alternative incorporated since the draft EIS was prepared include modifications to improve access to neighborhoods, reduce impacts, and maintain local connectivity. The mainline design speed is 70 miles per hour (mph), with a planned posted speed limit of 65 mph. Tolls would be collected by an electronic toll collection system that would involve pre-registration and use of a transponder/receiver system that would allow vehicles to move through the toll-collection locations at highway speeds. There would be no cash toll booths. For travelers who do not have a transponder, a video system would capture license plate information and the vehicles registrant would be billed. Total cost of implementing the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.28 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Gaston East-West Connector would improve east-west transportation mobility in the area around the City of Gastonia, between Gastonia and the Charlotte metropolitan area, and particularly to establish direct access between the rapidly growing areas of southeast Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 882 acres of upland forest, 4.1 acres of ponds, 7.5 acres of wetlands, and 38,894 linear feet of perennial streams. Highway right-of-way would cross 91 streams and convert 1,084 acres of prime and important farmland. Destruction of natural communities along the right-of-way would result in the loss of foraging and breeding habitats for various animal species. Right-of-way acquisition would impact 25 neighborhoods and require 348 residential relocations and 37 business relocations. Traffic noise would impact 245 receptors. Construction workers could encounter 21 to 24 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0466D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110011, Volume 1 (Final EIS and Appendices A, C-K)--343 pages, Volume 2 (Appendix B, Responses to Comments)--649 pages, Draft EIS and Additional Reports--CD-ROM, January 10, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 27 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-02-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Community Facilities KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Soils Surveys KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129609?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 10, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 26 of 29] T2 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873129591; 14767-1_0026 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll road extending 22 miles from I-85 west of Gastonia in Gaston County to I-485, near the Charlotte-Douglas International Airport, in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The project is known both as the Gaston East-West Connector and as the Garden Parkway. Limited crossings of the Catawba River constrain travel between Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties; and within southern Gaston County, south of I-85, a lack of connecting east-west roadways makes travel circuitous and limits mobility. Congestion and frequent incidents on I-85 inhibit regional travel and diminish the ability of I-85 to function as a strategic highway corridor and intrastate corridor. Projected growth in southern Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County would further increase demand for accessibility and connectivity between the two counties. Twelve new location detailed study alternatives (DSAs) and a No-Build Alternative are evaluated in this condensed final EIS. The preferred alternative (DSA 9) would have four 12-foot travel lanes, with a 50-foot median and 12-foot paved inside and outside shoulders. The typical right-of-way would be approximately 280 feet, with additional right-of-way required for interchanges, service roads, and improvements to intersecting roads. In addition, between NC 273 (Southpoint Road) and I-485, there would be an auxiliary lane in each direction. Although not part of the ultimate project, if a fifth and sixth lane are needed in the future, they would be constructed to the inside, resulting in a 26-foot paved median. From west to east, interchanges would be located at I-85, US 29-74, Linwood Road (SR 1133), US 321, Robinson Road (SR 2416), NC 274 (Union Road), NC 279 (South New Hope Road), NC 273 (Southpoint Road), Dixie River Road (SR-1155), and I-485. An interchange at Bud Wilson Road (SR-2423) was proposed for all DSAs in the draft EIS, but was eliminated as part of the preferred alternative. The project would include mainline bridge crossings of Blackwood Creek, an unnamed tributary to Crowders Creek located just east of US 321, Catawba Creek, South Fork Catawba River, and Catawba River. Design refinements to the preferred alternative incorporated since the draft EIS was prepared include modifications to improve access to neighborhoods, reduce impacts, and maintain local connectivity. The mainline design speed is 70 miles per hour (mph), with a planned posted speed limit of 65 mph. Tolls would be collected by an electronic toll collection system that would involve pre-registration and use of a transponder/receiver system that would allow vehicles to move through the toll-collection locations at highway speeds. There would be no cash toll booths. For travelers who do not have a transponder, a video system would capture license plate information and the vehicles registrant would be billed. Total cost of implementing the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.28 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Gaston East-West Connector would improve east-west transportation mobility in the area around the City of Gastonia, between Gastonia and the Charlotte metropolitan area, and particularly to establish direct access between the rapidly growing areas of southeast Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 882 acres of upland forest, 4.1 acres of ponds, 7.5 acres of wetlands, and 38,894 linear feet of perennial streams. Highway right-of-way would cross 91 streams and convert 1,084 acres of prime and important farmland. Destruction of natural communities along the right-of-way would result in the loss of foraging and breeding habitats for various animal species. Right-of-way acquisition would impact 25 neighborhoods and require 348 residential relocations and 37 business relocations. Traffic noise would impact 245 receptors. Construction workers could encounter 21 to 24 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0466D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110011, Volume 1 (Final EIS and Appendices A, C-K)--343 pages, Volume 2 (Appendix B, Responses to Comments)--649 pages, Draft EIS and Additional Reports--CD-ROM, January 10, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 26 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-02-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Community Facilities KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Soils Surveys KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129591?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 10, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 24 of 29] T2 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873129571; 14767-1_0024 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll road extending 22 miles from I-85 west of Gastonia in Gaston County to I-485, near the Charlotte-Douglas International Airport, in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The project is known both as the Gaston East-West Connector and as the Garden Parkway. Limited crossings of the Catawba River constrain travel between Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties; and within southern Gaston County, south of I-85, a lack of connecting east-west roadways makes travel circuitous and limits mobility. Congestion and frequent incidents on I-85 inhibit regional travel and diminish the ability of I-85 to function as a strategic highway corridor and intrastate corridor. Projected growth in southern Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County would further increase demand for accessibility and connectivity between the two counties. Twelve new location detailed study alternatives (DSAs) and a No-Build Alternative are evaluated in this condensed final EIS. The preferred alternative (DSA 9) would have four 12-foot travel lanes, with a 50-foot median and 12-foot paved inside and outside shoulders. The typical right-of-way would be approximately 280 feet, with additional right-of-way required for interchanges, service roads, and improvements to intersecting roads. In addition, between NC 273 (Southpoint Road) and I-485, there would be an auxiliary lane in each direction. Although not part of the ultimate project, if a fifth and sixth lane are needed in the future, they would be constructed to the inside, resulting in a 26-foot paved median. From west to east, interchanges would be located at I-85, US 29-74, Linwood Road (SR 1133), US 321, Robinson Road (SR 2416), NC 274 (Union Road), NC 279 (South New Hope Road), NC 273 (Southpoint Road), Dixie River Road (SR-1155), and I-485. An interchange at Bud Wilson Road (SR-2423) was proposed for all DSAs in the draft EIS, but was eliminated as part of the preferred alternative. The project would include mainline bridge crossings of Blackwood Creek, an unnamed tributary to Crowders Creek located just east of US 321, Catawba Creek, South Fork Catawba River, and Catawba River. Design refinements to the preferred alternative incorporated since the draft EIS was prepared include modifications to improve access to neighborhoods, reduce impacts, and maintain local connectivity. The mainline design speed is 70 miles per hour (mph), with a planned posted speed limit of 65 mph. Tolls would be collected by an electronic toll collection system that would involve pre-registration and use of a transponder/receiver system that would allow vehicles to move through the toll-collection locations at highway speeds. There would be no cash toll booths. For travelers who do not have a transponder, a video system would capture license plate information and the vehicles registrant would be billed. Total cost of implementing the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.28 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Gaston East-West Connector would improve east-west transportation mobility in the area around the City of Gastonia, between Gastonia and the Charlotte metropolitan area, and particularly to establish direct access between the rapidly growing areas of southeast Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 882 acres of upland forest, 4.1 acres of ponds, 7.5 acres of wetlands, and 38,894 linear feet of perennial streams. Highway right-of-way would cross 91 streams and convert 1,084 acres of prime and important farmland. Destruction of natural communities along the right-of-way would result in the loss of foraging and breeding habitats for various animal species. Right-of-way acquisition would impact 25 neighborhoods and require 348 residential relocations and 37 business relocations. Traffic noise would impact 245 receptors. Construction workers could encounter 21 to 24 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0466D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110011, Volume 1 (Final EIS and Appendices A, C-K)--343 pages, Volume 2 (Appendix B, Responses to Comments)--649 pages, Draft EIS and Additional Reports--CD-ROM, January 10, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 24 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-02-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Community Facilities KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Soils Surveys KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129571?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 10, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 23 of 29] T2 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873129548; 14767-1_0023 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll road extending 22 miles from I-85 west of Gastonia in Gaston County to I-485, near the Charlotte-Douglas International Airport, in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The project is known both as the Gaston East-West Connector and as the Garden Parkway. Limited crossings of the Catawba River constrain travel between Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties; and within southern Gaston County, south of I-85, a lack of connecting east-west roadways makes travel circuitous and limits mobility. Congestion and frequent incidents on I-85 inhibit regional travel and diminish the ability of I-85 to function as a strategic highway corridor and intrastate corridor. Projected growth in southern Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County would further increase demand for accessibility and connectivity between the two counties. Twelve new location detailed study alternatives (DSAs) and a No-Build Alternative are evaluated in this condensed final EIS. The preferred alternative (DSA 9) would have four 12-foot travel lanes, with a 50-foot median and 12-foot paved inside and outside shoulders. The typical right-of-way would be approximately 280 feet, with additional right-of-way required for interchanges, service roads, and improvements to intersecting roads. In addition, between NC 273 (Southpoint Road) and I-485, there would be an auxiliary lane in each direction. Although not part of the ultimate project, if a fifth and sixth lane are needed in the future, they would be constructed to the inside, resulting in a 26-foot paved median. From west to east, interchanges would be located at I-85, US 29-74, Linwood Road (SR 1133), US 321, Robinson Road (SR 2416), NC 274 (Union Road), NC 279 (South New Hope Road), NC 273 (Southpoint Road), Dixie River Road (SR-1155), and I-485. An interchange at Bud Wilson Road (SR-2423) was proposed for all DSAs in the draft EIS, but was eliminated as part of the preferred alternative. The project would include mainline bridge crossings of Blackwood Creek, an unnamed tributary to Crowders Creek located just east of US 321, Catawba Creek, South Fork Catawba River, and Catawba River. Design refinements to the preferred alternative incorporated since the draft EIS was prepared include modifications to improve access to neighborhoods, reduce impacts, and maintain local connectivity. The mainline design speed is 70 miles per hour (mph), with a planned posted speed limit of 65 mph. Tolls would be collected by an electronic toll collection system that would involve pre-registration and use of a transponder/receiver system that would allow vehicles to move through the toll-collection locations at highway speeds. There would be no cash toll booths. For travelers who do not have a transponder, a video system would capture license plate information and the vehicles registrant would be billed. Total cost of implementing the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.28 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Gaston East-West Connector would improve east-west transportation mobility in the area around the City of Gastonia, between Gastonia and the Charlotte metropolitan area, and particularly to establish direct access between the rapidly growing areas of southeast Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 882 acres of upland forest, 4.1 acres of ponds, 7.5 acres of wetlands, and 38,894 linear feet of perennial streams. Highway right-of-way would cross 91 streams and convert 1,084 acres of prime and important farmland. Destruction of natural communities along the right-of-way would result in the loss of foraging and breeding habitats for various animal species. Right-of-way acquisition would impact 25 neighborhoods and require 348 residential relocations and 37 business relocations. Traffic noise would impact 245 receptors. Construction workers could encounter 21 to 24 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0466D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110011, Volume 1 (Final EIS and Appendices A, C-K)--343 pages, Volume 2 (Appendix B, Responses to Comments)--649 pages, Draft EIS and Additional Reports--CD-ROM, January 10, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 23 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-02-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Community Facilities KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Soils Surveys KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129548?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 10, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 17 of 29] T2 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873129533; 14767-1_0017 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll road extending 22 miles from I-85 west of Gastonia in Gaston County to I-485, near the Charlotte-Douglas International Airport, in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The project is known both as the Gaston East-West Connector and as the Garden Parkway. Limited crossings of the Catawba River constrain travel between Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties; and within southern Gaston County, south of I-85, a lack of connecting east-west roadways makes travel circuitous and limits mobility. Congestion and frequent incidents on I-85 inhibit regional travel and diminish the ability of I-85 to function as a strategic highway corridor and intrastate corridor. Projected growth in southern Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County would further increase demand for accessibility and connectivity between the two counties. Twelve new location detailed study alternatives (DSAs) and a No-Build Alternative are evaluated in this condensed final EIS. The preferred alternative (DSA 9) would have four 12-foot travel lanes, with a 50-foot median and 12-foot paved inside and outside shoulders. The typical right-of-way would be approximately 280 feet, with additional right-of-way required for interchanges, service roads, and improvements to intersecting roads. In addition, between NC 273 (Southpoint Road) and I-485, there would be an auxiliary lane in each direction. Although not part of the ultimate project, if a fifth and sixth lane are needed in the future, they would be constructed to the inside, resulting in a 26-foot paved median. From west to east, interchanges would be located at I-85, US 29-74, Linwood Road (SR 1133), US 321, Robinson Road (SR 2416), NC 274 (Union Road), NC 279 (South New Hope Road), NC 273 (Southpoint Road), Dixie River Road (SR-1155), and I-485. An interchange at Bud Wilson Road (SR-2423) was proposed for all DSAs in the draft EIS, but was eliminated as part of the preferred alternative. The project would include mainline bridge crossings of Blackwood Creek, an unnamed tributary to Crowders Creek located just east of US 321, Catawba Creek, South Fork Catawba River, and Catawba River. Design refinements to the preferred alternative incorporated since the draft EIS was prepared include modifications to improve access to neighborhoods, reduce impacts, and maintain local connectivity. The mainline design speed is 70 miles per hour (mph), with a planned posted speed limit of 65 mph. Tolls would be collected by an electronic toll collection system that would involve pre-registration and use of a transponder/receiver system that would allow vehicles to move through the toll-collection locations at highway speeds. There would be no cash toll booths. For travelers who do not have a transponder, a video system would capture license plate information and the vehicles registrant would be billed. Total cost of implementing the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.28 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Gaston East-West Connector would improve east-west transportation mobility in the area around the City of Gastonia, between Gastonia and the Charlotte metropolitan area, and particularly to establish direct access between the rapidly growing areas of southeast Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 882 acres of upland forest, 4.1 acres of ponds, 7.5 acres of wetlands, and 38,894 linear feet of perennial streams. Highway right-of-way would cross 91 streams and convert 1,084 acres of prime and important farmland. Destruction of natural communities along the right-of-way would result in the loss of foraging and breeding habitats for various animal species. Right-of-way acquisition would impact 25 neighborhoods and require 348 residential relocations and 37 business relocations. Traffic noise would impact 245 receptors. Construction workers could encounter 21 to 24 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0466D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110011, Volume 1 (Final EIS and Appendices A, C-K)--343 pages, Volume 2 (Appendix B, Responses to Comments)--649 pages, Draft EIS and Additional Reports--CD-ROM, January 10, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 17 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-02-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Community Facilities KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Soils Surveys KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129533?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 10, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 16 of 29] T2 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873129496; 14767-1_0016 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll road extending 22 miles from I-85 west of Gastonia in Gaston County to I-485, near the Charlotte-Douglas International Airport, in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The project is known both as the Gaston East-West Connector and as the Garden Parkway. Limited crossings of the Catawba River constrain travel between Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties; and within southern Gaston County, south of I-85, a lack of connecting east-west roadways makes travel circuitous and limits mobility. Congestion and frequent incidents on I-85 inhibit regional travel and diminish the ability of I-85 to function as a strategic highway corridor and intrastate corridor. Projected growth in southern Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County would further increase demand for accessibility and connectivity between the two counties. Twelve new location detailed study alternatives (DSAs) and a No-Build Alternative are evaluated in this condensed final EIS. The preferred alternative (DSA 9) would have four 12-foot travel lanes, with a 50-foot median and 12-foot paved inside and outside shoulders. The typical right-of-way would be approximately 280 feet, with additional right-of-way required for interchanges, service roads, and improvements to intersecting roads. In addition, between NC 273 (Southpoint Road) and I-485, there would be an auxiliary lane in each direction. Although not part of the ultimate project, if a fifth and sixth lane are needed in the future, they would be constructed to the inside, resulting in a 26-foot paved median. From west to east, interchanges would be located at I-85, US 29-74, Linwood Road (SR 1133), US 321, Robinson Road (SR 2416), NC 274 (Union Road), NC 279 (South New Hope Road), NC 273 (Southpoint Road), Dixie River Road (SR-1155), and I-485. An interchange at Bud Wilson Road (SR-2423) was proposed for all DSAs in the draft EIS, but was eliminated as part of the preferred alternative. The project would include mainline bridge crossings of Blackwood Creek, an unnamed tributary to Crowders Creek located just east of US 321, Catawba Creek, South Fork Catawba River, and Catawba River. Design refinements to the preferred alternative incorporated since the draft EIS was prepared include modifications to improve access to neighborhoods, reduce impacts, and maintain local connectivity. The mainline design speed is 70 miles per hour (mph), with a planned posted speed limit of 65 mph. Tolls would be collected by an electronic toll collection system that would involve pre-registration and use of a transponder/receiver system that would allow vehicles to move through the toll-collection locations at highway speeds. There would be no cash toll booths. For travelers who do not have a transponder, a video system would capture license plate information and the vehicles registrant would be billed. Total cost of implementing the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.28 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Gaston East-West Connector would improve east-west transportation mobility in the area around the City of Gastonia, between Gastonia and the Charlotte metropolitan area, and particularly to establish direct access between the rapidly growing areas of southeast Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 882 acres of upland forest, 4.1 acres of ponds, 7.5 acres of wetlands, and 38,894 linear feet of perennial streams. Highway right-of-way would cross 91 streams and convert 1,084 acres of prime and important farmland. Destruction of natural communities along the right-of-way would result in the loss of foraging and breeding habitats for various animal species. Right-of-way acquisition would impact 25 neighborhoods and require 348 residential relocations and 37 business relocations. Traffic noise would impact 245 receptors. Construction workers could encounter 21 to 24 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0466D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110011, Volume 1 (Final EIS and Appendices A, C-K)--343 pages, Volume 2 (Appendix B, Responses to Comments)--649 pages, Draft EIS and Additional Reports--CD-ROM, January 10, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 16 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-02-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Community Facilities KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Soils Surveys KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129496?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 10, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 14 of 29] T2 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873129466; 14767-1_0014 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll road extending 22 miles from I-85 west of Gastonia in Gaston County to I-485, near the Charlotte-Douglas International Airport, in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The project is known both as the Gaston East-West Connector and as the Garden Parkway. Limited crossings of the Catawba River constrain travel between Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties; and within southern Gaston County, south of I-85, a lack of connecting east-west roadways makes travel circuitous and limits mobility. Congestion and frequent incidents on I-85 inhibit regional travel and diminish the ability of I-85 to function as a strategic highway corridor and intrastate corridor. Projected growth in southern Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County would further increase demand for accessibility and connectivity between the two counties. Twelve new location detailed study alternatives (DSAs) and a No-Build Alternative are evaluated in this condensed final EIS. The preferred alternative (DSA 9) would have four 12-foot travel lanes, with a 50-foot median and 12-foot paved inside and outside shoulders. The typical right-of-way would be approximately 280 feet, with additional right-of-way required for interchanges, service roads, and improvements to intersecting roads. In addition, between NC 273 (Southpoint Road) and I-485, there would be an auxiliary lane in each direction. Although not part of the ultimate project, if a fifth and sixth lane are needed in the future, they would be constructed to the inside, resulting in a 26-foot paved median. From west to east, interchanges would be located at I-85, US 29-74, Linwood Road (SR 1133), US 321, Robinson Road (SR 2416), NC 274 (Union Road), NC 279 (South New Hope Road), NC 273 (Southpoint Road), Dixie River Road (SR-1155), and I-485. An interchange at Bud Wilson Road (SR-2423) was proposed for all DSAs in the draft EIS, but was eliminated as part of the preferred alternative. The project would include mainline bridge crossings of Blackwood Creek, an unnamed tributary to Crowders Creek located just east of US 321, Catawba Creek, South Fork Catawba River, and Catawba River. Design refinements to the preferred alternative incorporated since the draft EIS was prepared include modifications to improve access to neighborhoods, reduce impacts, and maintain local connectivity. The mainline design speed is 70 miles per hour (mph), with a planned posted speed limit of 65 mph. Tolls would be collected by an electronic toll collection system that would involve pre-registration and use of a transponder/receiver system that would allow vehicles to move through the toll-collection locations at highway speeds. There would be no cash toll booths. For travelers who do not have a transponder, a video system would capture license plate information and the vehicles registrant would be billed. Total cost of implementing the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.28 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Gaston East-West Connector would improve east-west transportation mobility in the area around the City of Gastonia, between Gastonia and the Charlotte metropolitan area, and particularly to establish direct access between the rapidly growing areas of southeast Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 882 acres of upland forest, 4.1 acres of ponds, 7.5 acres of wetlands, and 38,894 linear feet of perennial streams. Highway right-of-way would cross 91 streams and convert 1,084 acres of prime and important farmland. Destruction of natural communities along the right-of-way would result in the loss of foraging and breeding habitats for various animal species. Right-of-way acquisition would impact 25 neighborhoods and require 348 residential relocations and 37 business relocations. Traffic noise would impact 245 receptors. Construction workers could encounter 21 to 24 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0466D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110011, Volume 1 (Final EIS and Appendices A, C-K)--343 pages, Volume 2 (Appendix B, Responses to Comments)--649 pages, Draft EIS and Additional Reports--CD-ROM, January 10, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-02-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Community Facilities KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Soils Surveys KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129466?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 10, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 25 of 29] T2 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873128550; 14767-1_0025 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll road extending 22 miles from I-85 west of Gastonia in Gaston County to I-485, near the Charlotte-Douglas International Airport, in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The project is known both as the Gaston East-West Connector and as the Garden Parkway. Limited crossings of the Catawba River constrain travel between Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties; and within southern Gaston County, south of I-85, a lack of connecting east-west roadways makes travel circuitous and limits mobility. Congestion and frequent incidents on I-85 inhibit regional travel and diminish the ability of I-85 to function as a strategic highway corridor and intrastate corridor. Projected growth in southern Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County would further increase demand for accessibility and connectivity between the two counties. Twelve new location detailed study alternatives (DSAs) and a No-Build Alternative are evaluated in this condensed final EIS. The preferred alternative (DSA 9) would have four 12-foot travel lanes, with a 50-foot median and 12-foot paved inside and outside shoulders. The typical right-of-way would be approximately 280 feet, with additional right-of-way required for interchanges, service roads, and improvements to intersecting roads. In addition, between NC 273 (Southpoint Road) and I-485, there would be an auxiliary lane in each direction. Although not part of the ultimate project, if a fifth and sixth lane are needed in the future, they would be constructed to the inside, resulting in a 26-foot paved median. From west to east, interchanges would be located at I-85, US 29-74, Linwood Road (SR 1133), US 321, Robinson Road (SR 2416), NC 274 (Union Road), NC 279 (South New Hope Road), NC 273 (Southpoint Road), Dixie River Road (SR-1155), and I-485. An interchange at Bud Wilson Road (SR-2423) was proposed for all DSAs in the draft EIS, but was eliminated as part of the preferred alternative. The project would include mainline bridge crossings of Blackwood Creek, an unnamed tributary to Crowders Creek located just east of US 321, Catawba Creek, South Fork Catawba River, and Catawba River. Design refinements to the preferred alternative incorporated since the draft EIS was prepared include modifications to improve access to neighborhoods, reduce impacts, and maintain local connectivity. The mainline design speed is 70 miles per hour (mph), with a planned posted speed limit of 65 mph. Tolls would be collected by an electronic toll collection system that would involve pre-registration and use of a transponder/receiver system that would allow vehicles to move through the toll-collection locations at highway speeds. There would be no cash toll booths. For travelers who do not have a transponder, a video system would capture license plate information and the vehicles registrant would be billed. Total cost of implementing the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.28 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Gaston East-West Connector would improve east-west transportation mobility in the area around the City of Gastonia, between Gastonia and the Charlotte metropolitan area, and particularly to establish direct access between the rapidly growing areas of southeast Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 882 acres of upland forest, 4.1 acres of ponds, 7.5 acres of wetlands, and 38,894 linear feet of perennial streams. Highway right-of-way would cross 91 streams and convert 1,084 acres of prime and important farmland. Destruction of natural communities along the right-of-way would result in the loss of foraging and breeding habitats for various animal species. Right-of-way acquisition would impact 25 neighborhoods and require 348 residential relocations and 37 business relocations. Traffic noise would impact 245 receptors. Construction workers could encounter 21 to 24 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0466D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110011, Volume 1 (Final EIS and Appendices A, C-K)--343 pages, Volume 2 (Appendix B, Responses to Comments)--649 pages, Draft EIS and Additional Reports--CD-ROM, January 10, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 25 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-02-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Community Facilities KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Soils Surveys KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128550?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 10, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 19 of 29] T2 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873128530; 14767-1_0019 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll road extending 22 miles from I-85 west of Gastonia in Gaston County to I-485, near the Charlotte-Douglas International Airport, in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The project is known both as the Gaston East-West Connector and as the Garden Parkway. Limited crossings of the Catawba River constrain travel between Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties; and within southern Gaston County, south of I-85, a lack of connecting east-west roadways makes travel circuitous and limits mobility. Congestion and frequent incidents on I-85 inhibit regional travel and diminish the ability of I-85 to function as a strategic highway corridor and intrastate corridor. Projected growth in southern Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County would further increase demand for accessibility and connectivity between the two counties. Twelve new location detailed study alternatives (DSAs) and a No-Build Alternative are evaluated in this condensed final EIS. The preferred alternative (DSA 9) would have four 12-foot travel lanes, with a 50-foot median and 12-foot paved inside and outside shoulders. The typical right-of-way would be approximately 280 feet, with additional right-of-way required for interchanges, service roads, and improvements to intersecting roads. In addition, between NC 273 (Southpoint Road) and I-485, there would be an auxiliary lane in each direction. Although not part of the ultimate project, if a fifth and sixth lane are needed in the future, they would be constructed to the inside, resulting in a 26-foot paved median. From west to east, interchanges would be located at I-85, US 29-74, Linwood Road (SR 1133), US 321, Robinson Road (SR 2416), NC 274 (Union Road), NC 279 (South New Hope Road), NC 273 (Southpoint Road), Dixie River Road (SR-1155), and I-485. An interchange at Bud Wilson Road (SR-2423) was proposed for all DSAs in the draft EIS, but was eliminated as part of the preferred alternative. The project would include mainline bridge crossings of Blackwood Creek, an unnamed tributary to Crowders Creek located just east of US 321, Catawba Creek, South Fork Catawba River, and Catawba River. Design refinements to the preferred alternative incorporated since the draft EIS was prepared include modifications to improve access to neighborhoods, reduce impacts, and maintain local connectivity. The mainline design speed is 70 miles per hour (mph), with a planned posted speed limit of 65 mph. Tolls would be collected by an electronic toll collection system that would involve pre-registration and use of a transponder/receiver system that would allow vehicles to move through the toll-collection locations at highway speeds. There would be no cash toll booths. For travelers who do not have a transponder, a video system would capture license plate information and the vehicles registrant would be billed. Total cost of implementing the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.28 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Gaston East-West Connector would improve east-west transportation mobility in the area around the City of Gastonia, between Gastonia and the Charlotte metropolitan area, and particularly to establish direct access between the rapidly growing areas of southeast Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 882 acres of upland forest, 4.1 acres of ponds, 7.5 acres of wetlands, and 38,894 linear feet of perennial streams. Highway right-of-way would cross 91 streams and convert 1,084 acres of prime and important farmland. Destruction of natural communities along the right-of-way would result in the loss of foraging and breeding habitats for various animal species. Right-of-way acquisition would impact 25 neighborhoods and require 348 residential relocations and 37 business relocations. Traffic noise would impact 245 receptors. Construction workers could encounter 21 to 24 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0466D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110011, Volume 1 (Final EIS and Appendices A, C-K)--343 pages, Volume 2 (Appendix B, Responses to Comments)--649 pages, Draft EIS and Additional Reports--CD-ROM, January 10, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 19 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-02-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Community Facilities KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Soils Surveys KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128530?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 10, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 18 of 29] T2 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873128510; 14767-1_0018 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll road extending 22 miles from I-85 west of Gastonia in Gaston County to I-485, near the Charlotte-Douglas International Airport, in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The project is known both as the Gaston East-West Connector and as the Garden Parkway. Limited crossings of the Catawba River constrain travel between Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties; and within southern Gaston County, south of I-85, a lack of connecting east-west roadways makes travel circuitous and limits mobility. Congestion and frequent incidents on I-85 inhibit regional travel and diminish the ability of I-85 to function as a strategic highway corridor and intrastate corridor. Projected growth in southern Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County would further increase demand for accessibility and connectivity between the two counties. Twelve new location detailed study alternatives (DSAs) and a No-Build Alternative are evaluated in this condensed final EIS. The preferred alternative (DSA 9) would have four 12-foot travel lanes, with a 50-foot median and 12-foot paved inside and outside shoulders. The typical right-of-way would be approximately 280 feet, with additional right-of-way required for interchanges, service roads, and improvements to intersecting roads. In addition, between NC 273 (Southpoint Road) and I-485, there would be an auxiliary lane in each direction. Although not part of the ultimate project, if a fifth and sixth lane are needed in the future, they would be constructed to the inside, resulting in a 26-foot paved median. From west to east, interchanges would be located at I-85, US 29-74, Linwood Road (SR 1133), US 321, Robinson Road (SR 2416), NC 274 (Union Road), NC 279 (South New Hope Road), NC 273 (Southpoint Road), Dixie River Road (SR-1155), and I-485. An interchange at Bud Wilson Road (SR-2423) was proposed for all DSAs in the draft EIS, but was eliminated as part of the preferred alternative. The project would include mainline bridge crossings of Blackwood Creek, an unnamed tributary to Crowders Creek located just east of US 321, Catawba Creek, South Fork Catawba River, and Catawba River. Design refinements to the preferred alternative incorporated since the draft EIS was prepared include modifications to improve access to neighborhoods, reduce impacts, and maintain local connectivity. The mainline design speed is 70 miles per hour (mph), with a planned posted speed limit of 65 mph. Tolls would be collected by an electronic toll collection system that would involve pre-registration and use of a transponder/receiver system that would allow vehicles to move through the toll-collection locations at highway speeds. There would be no cash toll booths. For travelers who do not have a transponder, a video system would capture license plate information and the vehicles registrant would be billed. Total cost of implementing the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.28 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Gaston East-West Connector would improve east-west transportation mobility in the area around the City of Gastonia, between Gastonia and the Charlotte metropolitan area, and particularly to establish direct access between the rapidly growing areas of southeast Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 882 acres of upland forest, 4.1 acres of ponds, 7.5 acres of wetlands, and 38,894 linear feet of perennial streams. Highway right-of-way would cross 91 streams and convert 1,084 acres of prime and important farmland. Destruction of natural communities along the right-of-way would result in the loss of foraging and breeding habitats for various animal species. Right-of-way acquisition would impact 25 neighborhoods and require 348 residential relocations and 37 business relocations. Traffic noise would impact 245 receptors. Construction workers could encounter 21 to 24 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0466D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110011, Volume 1 (Final EIS and Appendices A, C-K)--343 pages, Volume 2 (Appendix B, Responses to Comments)--649 pages, Draft EIS and Additional Reports--CD-ROM, January 10, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 18 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-02-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Community Facilities KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Soils Surveys KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128510?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 10, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 21 of 29] T2 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873128291; 14767-1_0021 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll road extending 22 miles from I-85 west of Gastonia in Gaston County to I-485, near the Charlotte-Douglas International Airport, in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The project is known both as the Gaston East-West Connector and as the Garden Parkway. Limited crossings of the Catawba River constrain travel between Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties; and within southern Gaston County, south of I-85, a lack of connecting east-west roadways makes travel circuitous and limits mobility. Congestion and frequent incidents on I-85 inhibit regional travel and diminish the ability of I-85 to function as a strategic highway corridor and intrastate corridor. Projected growth in southern Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County would further increase demand for accessibility and connectivity between the two counties. Twelve new location detailed study alternatives (DSAs) and a No-Build Alternative are evaluated in this condensed final EIS. The preferred alternative (DSA 9) would have four 12-foot travel lanes, with a 50-foot median and 12-foot paved inside and outside shoulders. The typical right-of-way would be approximately 280 feet, with additional right-of-way required for interchanges, service roads, and improvements to intersecting roads. In addition, between NC 273 (Southpoint Road) and I-485, there would be an auxiliary lane in each direction. Although not part of the ultimate project, if a fifth and sixth lane are needed in the future, they would be constructed to the inside, resulting in a 26-foot paved median. From west to east, interchanges would be located at I-85, US 29-74, Linwood Road (SR 1133), US 321, Robinson Road (SR 2416), NC 274 (Union Road), NC 279 (South New Hope Road), NC 273 (Southpoint Road), Dixie River Road (SR-1155), and I-485. An interchange at Bud Wilson Road (SR-2423) was proposed for all DSAs in the draft EIS, but was eliminated as part of the preferred alternative. The project would include mainline bridge crossings of Blackwood Creek, an unnamed tributary to Crowders Creek located just east of US 321, Catawba Creek, South Fork Catawba River, and Catawba River. Design refinements to the preferred alternative incorporated since the draft EIS was prepared include modifications to improve access to neighborhoods, reduce impacts, and maintain local connectivity. The mainline design speed is 70 miles per hour (mph), with a planned posted speed limit of 65 mph. Tolls would be collected by an electronic toll collection system that would involve pre-registration and use of a transponder/receiver system that would allow vehicles to move through the toll-collection locations at highway speeds. There would be no cash toll booths. For travelers who do not have a transponder, a video system would capture license plate information and the vehicles registrant would be billed. Total cost of implementing the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.28 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Gaston East-West Connector would improve east-west transportation mobility in the area around the City of Gastonia, between Gastonia and the Charlotte metropolitan area, and particularly to establish direct access between the rapidly growing areas of southeast Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 882 acres of upland forest, 4.1 acres of ponds, 7.5 acres of wetlands, and 38,894 linear feet of perennial streams. Highway right-of-way would cross 91 streams and convert 1,084 acres of prime and important farmland. Destruction of natural communities along the right-of-way would result in the loss of foraging and breeding habitats for various animal species. Right-of-way acquisition would impact 25 neighborhoods and require 348 residential relocations and 37 business relocations. Traffic noise would impact 245 receptors. Construction workers could encounter 21 to 24 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0466D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110011, Volume 1 (Final EIS and Appendices A, C-K)--343 pages, Volume 2 (Appendix B, Responses to Comments)--649 pages, Draft EIS and Additional Reports--CD-ROM, January 10, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 21 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-02-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Community Facilities KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Soils Surveys KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128291?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 10, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 20 of 29] T2 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873128283; 14767-1_0020 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll road extending 22 miles from I-85 west of Gastonia in Gaston County to I-485, near the Charlotte-Douglas International Airport, in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The project is known both as the Gaston East-West Connector and as the Garden Parkway. Limited crossings of the Catawba River constrain travel between Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties; and within southern Gaston County, south of I-85, a lack of connecting east-west roadways makes travel circuitous and limits mobility. Congestion and frequent incidents on I-85 inhibit regional travel and diminish the ability of I-85 to function as a strategic highway corridor and intrastate corridor. Projected growth in southern Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County would further increase demand for accessibility and connectivity between the two counties. Twelve new location detailed study alternatives (DSAs) and a No-Build Alternative are evaluated in this condensed final EIS. The preferred alternative (DSA 9) would have four 12-foot travel lanes, with a 50-foot median and 12-foot paved inside and outside shoulders. The typical right-of-way would be approximately 280 feet, with additional right-of-way required for interchanges, service roads, and improvements to intersecting roads. In addition, between NC 273 (Southpoint Road) and I-485, there would be an auxiliary lane in each direction. Although not part of the ultimate project, if a fifth and sixth lane are needed in the future, they would be constructed to the inside, resulting in a 26-foot paved median. From west to east, interchanges would be located at I-85, US 29-74, Linwood Road (SR 1133), US 321, Robinson Road (SR 2416), NC 274 (Union Road), NC 279 (South New Hope Road), NC 273 (Southpoint Road), Dixie River Road (SR-1155), and I-485. An interchange at Bud Wilson Road (SR-2423) was proposed for all DSAs in the draft EIS, but was eliminated as part of the preferred alternative. The project would include mainline bridge crossings of Blackwood Creek, an unnamed tributary to Crowders Creek located just east of US 321, Catawba Creek, South Fork Catawba River, and Catawba River. Design refinements to the preferred alternative incorporated since the draft EIS was prepared include modifications to improve access to neighborhoods, reduce impacts, and maintain local connectivity. The mainline design speed is 70 miles per hour (mph), with a planned posted speed limit of 65 mph. Tolls would be collected by an electronic toll collection system that would involve pre-registration and use of a transponder/receiver system that would allow vehicles to move through the toll-collection locations at highway speeds. There would be no cash toll booths. For travelers who do not have a transponder, a video system would capture license plate information and the vehicles registrant would be billed. Total cost of implementing the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.28 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Gaston East-West Connector would improve east-west transportation mobility in the area around the City of Gastonia, between Gastonia and the Charlotte metropolitan area, and particularly to establish direct access between the rapidly growing areas of southeast Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 882 acres of upland forest, 4.1 acres of ponds, 7.5 acres of wetlands, and 38,894 linear feet of perennial streams. Highway right-of-way would cross 91 streams and convert 1,084 acres of prime and important farmland. Destruction of natural communities along the right-of-way would result in the loss of foraging and breeding habitats for various animal species. Right-of-way acquisition would impact 25 neighborhoods and require 348 residential relocations and 37 business relocations. Traffic noise would impact 245 receptors. Construction workers could encounter 21 to 24 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0466D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110011, Volume 1 (Final EIS and Appendices A, C-K)--343 pages, Volume 2 (Appendix B, Responses to Comments)--649 pages, Draft EIS and Additional Reports--CD-ROM, January 10, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 20 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-02-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Community Facilities KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Soils Surveys KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128283?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 10, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 15 of 29] T2 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873128273; 14767-1_0015 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll road extending 22 miles from I-85 west of Gastonia in Gaston County to I-485, near the Charlotte-Douglas International Airport, in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The project is known both as the Gaston East-West Connector and as the Garden Parkway. Limited crossings of the Catawba River constrain travel between Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties; and within southern Gaston County, south of I-85, a lack of connecting east-west roadways makes travel circuitous and limits mobility. Congestion and frequent incidents on I-85 inhibit regional travel and diminish the ability of I-85 to function as a strategic highway corridor and intrastate corridor. Projected growth in southern Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County would further increase demand for accessibility and connectivity between the two counties. Twelve new location detailed study alternatives (DSAs) and a No-Build Alternative are evaluated in this condensed final EIS. The preferred alternative (DSA 9) would have four 12-foot travel lanes, with a 50-foot median and 12-foot paved inside and outside shoulders. The typical right-of-way would be approximately 280 feet, with additional right-of-way required for interchanges, service roads, and improvements to intersecting roads. In addition, between NC 273 (Southpoint Road) and I-485, there would be an auxiliary lane in each direction. Although not part of the ultimate project, if a fifth and sixth lane are needed in the future, they would be constructed to the inside, resulting in a 26-foot paved median. From west to east, interchanges would be located at I-85, US 29-74, Linwood Road (SR 1133), US 321, Robinson Road (SR 2416), NC 274 (Union Road), NC 279 (South New Hope Road), NC 273 (Southpoint Road), Dixie River Road (SR-1155), and I-485. An interchange at Bud Wilson Road (SR-2423) was proposed for all DSAs in the draft EIS, but was eliminated as part of the preferred alternative. The project would include mainline bridge crossings of Blackwood Creek, an unnamed tributary to Crowders Creek located just east of US 321, Catawba Creek, South Fork Catawba River, and Catawba River. Design refinements to the preferred alternative incorporated since the draft EIS was prepared include modifications to improve access to neighborhoods, reduce impacts, and maintain local connectivity. The mainline design speed is 70 miles per hour (mph), with a planned posted speed limit of 65 mph. Tolls would be collected by an electronic toll collection system that would involve pre-registration and use of a transponder/receiver system that would allow vehicles to move through the toll-collection locations at highway speeds. There would be no cash toll booths. For travelers who do not have a transponder, a video system would capture license plate information and the vehicles registrant would be billed. Total cost of implementing the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.28 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Gaston East-West Connector would improve east-west transportation mobility in the area around the City of Gastonia, between Gastonia and the Charlotte metropolitan area, and particularly to establish direct access between the rapidly growing areas of southeast Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 882 acres of upland forest, 4.1 acres of ponds, 7.5 acres of wetlands, and 38,894 linear feet of perennial streams. Highway right-of-way would cross 91 streams and convert 1,084 acres of prime and important farmland. Destruction of natural communities along the right-of-way would result in the loss of foraging and breeding habitats for various animal species. Right-of-way acquisition would impact 25 neighborhoods and require 348 residential relocations and 37 business relocations. Traffic noise would impact 245 receptors. Construction workers could encounter 21 to 24 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0466D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110011, Volume 1 (Final EIS and Appendices A, C-K)--343 pages, Volume 2 (Appendix B, Responses to Comments)--649 pages, Draft EIS and Additional Reports--CD-ROM, January 10, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-02-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Community Facilities KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Soils Surveys KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128273?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 10, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 12 of 29] T2 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873127732; 14767-1_0012 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll road extending 22 miles from I-85 west of Gastonia in Gaston County to I-485, near the Charlotte-Douglas International Airport, in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The project is known both as the Gaston East-West Connector and as the Garden Parkway. Limited crossings of the Catawba River constrain travel between Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties; and within southern Gaston County, south of I-85, a lack of connecting east-west roadways makes travel circuitous and limits mobility. Congestion and frequent incidents on I-85 inhibit regional travel and diminish the ability of I-85 to function as a strategic highway corridor and intrastate corridor. Projected growth in southern Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County would further increase demand for accessibility and connectivity between the two counties. Twelve new location detailed study alternatives (DSAs) and a No-Build Alternative are evaluated in this condensed final EIS. The preferred alternative (DSA 9) would have four 12-foot travel lanes, with a 50-foot median and 12-foot paved inside and outside shoulders. The typical right-of-way would be approximately 280 feet, with additional right-of-way required for interchanges, service roads, and improvements to intersecting roads. In addition, between NC 273 (Southpoint Road) and I-485, there would be an auxiliary lane in each direction. Although not part of the ultimate project, if a fifth and sixth lane are needed in the future, they would be constructed to the inside, resulting in a 26-foot paved median. From west to east, interchanges would be located at I-85, US 29-74, Linwood Road (SR 1133), US 321, Robinson Road (SR 2416), NC 274 (Union Road), NC 279 (South New Hope Road), NC 273 (Southpoint Road), Dixie River Road (SR-1155), and I-485. An interchange at Bud Wilson Road (SR-2423) was proposed for all DSAs in the draft EIS, but was eliminated as part of the preferred alternative. The project would include mainline bridge crossings of Blackwood Creek, an unnamed tributary to Crowders Creek located just east of US 321, Catawba Creek, South Fork Catawba River, and Catawba River. Design refinements to the preferred alternative incorporated since the draft EIS was prepared include modifications to improve access to neighborhoods, reduce impacts, and maintain local connectivity. The mainline design speed is 70 miles per hour (mph), with a planned posted speed limit of 65 mph. Tolls would be collected by an electronic toll collection system that would involve pre-registration and use of a transponder/receiver system that would allow vehicles to move through the toll-collection locations at highway speeds. There would be no cash toll booths. For travelers who do not have a transponder, a video system would capture license plate information and the vehicles registrant would be billed. Total cost of implementing the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.28 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Gaston East-West Connector would improve east-west transportation mobility in the area around the City of Gastonia, between Gastonia and the Charlotte metropolitan area, and particularly to establish direct access between the rapidly growing areas of southeast Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 882 acres of upland forest, 4.1 acres of ponds, 7.5 acres of wetlands, and 38,894 linear feet of perennial streams. Highway right-of-way would cross 91 streams and convert 1,084 acres of prime and important farmland. Destruction of natural communities along the right-of-way would result in the loss of foraging and breeding habitats for various animal species. Right-of-way acquisition would impact 25 neighborhoods and require 348 residential relocations and 37 business relocations. Traffic noise would impact 245 receptors. Construction workers could encounter 21 to 24 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0466D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110011, Volume 1 (Final EIS and Appendices A, C-K)--343 pages, Volume 2 (Appendix B, Responses to Comments)--649 pages, Draft EIS and Additional Reports--CD-ROM, January 10, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-02-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Community Facilities KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Soils Surveys KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127732?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 10, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 11 of 29] T2 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873127728; 14767-1_0011 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll road extending 22 miles from I-85 west of Gastonia in Gaston County to I-485, near the Charlotte-Douglas International Airport, in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The project is known both as the Gaston East-West Connector and as the Garden Parkway. Limited crossings of the Catawba River constrain travel between Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties; and within southern Gaston County, south of I-85, a lack of connecting east-west roadways makes travel circuitous and limits mobility. Congestion and frequent incidents on I-85 inhibit regional travel and diminish the ability of I-85 to function as a strategic highway corridor and intrastate corridor. Projected growth in southern Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County would further increase demand for accessibility and connectivity between the two counties. Twelve new location detailed study alternatives (DSAs) and a No-Build Alternative are evaluated in this condensed final EIS. The preferred alternative (DSA 9) would have four 12-foot travel lanes, with a 50-foot median and 12-foot paved inside and outside shoulders. The typical right-of-way would be approximately 280 feet, with additional right-of-way required for interchanges, service roads, and improvements to intersecting roads. In addition, between NC 273 (Southpoint Road) and I-485, there would be an auxiliary lane in each direction. Although not part of the ultimate project, if a fifth and sixth lane are needed in the future, they would be constructed to the inside, resulting in a 26-foot paved median. From west to east, interchanges would be located at I-85, US 29-74, Linwood Road (SR 1133), US 321, Robinson Road (SR 2416), NC 274 (Union Road), NC 279 (South New Hope Road), NC 273 (Southpoint Road), Dixie River Road (SR-1155), and I-485. An interchange at Bud Wilson Road (SR-2423) was proposed for all DSAs in the draft EIS, but was eliminated as part of the preferred alternative. The project would include mainline bridge crossings of Blackwood Creek, an unnamed tributary to Crowders Creek located just east of US 321, Catawba Creek, South Fork Catawba River, and Catawba River. Design refinements to the preferred alternative incorporated since the draft EIS was prepared include modifications to improve access to neighborhoods, reduce impacts, and maintain local connectivity. The mainline design speed is 70 miles per hour (mph), with a planned posted speed limit of 65 mph. Tolls would be collected by an electronic toll collection system that would involve pre-registration and use of a transponder/receiver system that would allow vehicles to move through the toll-collection locations at highway speeds. There would be no cash toll booths. For travelers who do not have a transponder, a video system would capture license plate information and the vehicles registrant would be billed. Total cost of implementing the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.28 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Gaston East-West Connector would improve east-west transportation mobility in the area around the City of Gastonia, between Gastonia and the Charlotte metropolitan area, and particularly to establish direct access between the rapidly growing areas of southeast Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 882 acres of upland forest, 4.1 acres of ponds, 7.5 acres of wetlands, and 38,894 linear feet of perennial streams. Highway right-of-way would cross 91 streams and convert 1,084 acres of prime and important farmland. Destruction of natural communities along the right-of-way would result in the loss of foraging and breeding habitats for various animal species. Right-of-way acquisition would impact 25 neighborhoods and require 348 residential relocations and 37 business relocations. Traffic noise would impact 245 receptors. Construction workers could encounter 21 to 24 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0466D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110011, Volume 1 (Final EIS and Appendices A, C-K)--343 pages, Volume 2 (Appendix B, Responses to Comments)--649 pages, Draft EIS and Additional Reports--CD-ROM, January 10, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-02-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Community Facilities KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Soils Surveys KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127728?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 10, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 10 of 29] T2 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873127711; 14767-1_0010 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll road extending 22 miles from I-85 west of Gastonia in Gaston County to I-485, near the Charlotte-Douglas International Airport, in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The project is known both as the Gaston East-West Connector and as the Garden Parkway. Limited crossings of the Catawba River constrain travel between Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties; and within southern Gaston County, south of I-85, a lack of connecting east-west roadways makes travel circuitous and limits mobility. Congestion and frequent incidents on I-85 inhibit regional travel and diminish the ability of I-85 to function as a strategic highway corridor and intrastate corridor. Projected growth in southern Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County would further increase demand for accessibility and connectivity between the two counties. Twelve new location detailed study alternatives (DSAs) and a No-Build Alternative are evaluated in this condensed final EIS. The preferred alternative (DSA 9) would have four 12-foot travel lanes, with a 50-foot median and 12-foot paved inside and outside shoulders. The typical right-of-way would be approximately 280 feet, with additional right-of-way required for interchanges, service roads, and improvements to intersecting roads. In addition, between NC 273 (Southpoint Road) and I-485, there would be an auxiliary lane in each direction. Although not part of the ultimate project, if a fifth and sixth lane are needed in the future, they would be constructed to the inside, resulting in a 26-foot paved median. From west to east, interchanges would be located at I-85, US 29-74, Linwood Road (SR 1133), US 321, Robinson Road (SR 2416), NC 274 (Union Road), NC 279 (South New Hope Road), NC 273 (Southpoint Road), Dixie River Road (SR-1155), and I-485. An interchange at Bud Wilson Road (SR-2423) was proposed for all DSAs in the draft EIS, but was eliminated as part of the preferred alternative. The project would include mainline bridge crossings of Blackwood Creek, an unnamed tributary to Crowders Creek located just east of US 321, Catawba Creek, South Fork Catawba River, and Catawba River. Design refinements to the preferred alternative incorporated since the draft EIS was prepared include modifications to improve access to neighborhoods, reduce impacts, and maintain local connectivity. The mainline design speed is 70 miles per hour (mph), with a planned posted speed limit of 65 mph. Tolls would be collected by an electronic toll collection system that would involve pre-registration and use of a transponder/receiver system that would allow vehicles to move through the toll-collection locations at highway speeds. There would be no cash toll booths. For travelers who do not have a transponder, a video system would capture license plate information and the vehicles registrant would be billed. Total cost of implementing the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.28 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Gaston East-West Connector would improve east-west transportation mobility in the area around the City of Gastonia, between Gastonia and the Charlotte metropolitan area, and particularly to establish direct access between the rapidly growing areas of southeast Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 882 acres of upland forest, 4.1 acres of ponds, 7.5 acres of wetlands, and 38,894 linear feet of perennial streams. Highway right-of-way would cross 91 streams and convert 1,084 acres of prime and important farmland. Destruction of natural communities along the right-of-way would result in the loss of foraging and breeding habitats for various animal species. Right-of-way acquisition would impact 25 neighborhoods and require 348 residential relocations and 37 business relocations. Traffic noise would impact 245 receptors. Construction workers could encounter 21 to 24 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0466D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110011, Volume 1 (Final EIS and Appendices A, C-K)--343 pages, Volume 2 (Appendix B, Responses to Comments)--649 pages, Draft EIS and Additional Reports--CD-ROM, January 10, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-02-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Community Facilities KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Soils Surveys KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127711?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 10, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 9 of 29] T2 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873127707; 14767-1_0009 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll road extending 22 miles from I-85 west of Gastonia in Gaston County to I-485, near the Charlotte-Douglas International Airport, in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The project is known both as the Gaston East-West Connector and as the Garden Parkway. Limited crossings of the Catawba River constrain travel between Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties; and within southern Gaston County, south of I-85, a lack of connecting east-west roadways makes travel circuitous and limits mobility. Congestion and frequent incidents on I-85 inhibit regional travel and diminish the ability of I-85 to function as a strategic highway corridor and intrastate corridor. Projected growth in southern Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County would further increase demand for accessibility and connectivity between the two counties. Twelve new location detailed study alternatives (DSAs) and a No-Build Alternative are evaluated in this condensed final EIS. The preferred alternative (DSA 9) would have four 12-foot travel lanes, with a 50-foot median and 12-foot paved inside and outside shoulders. The typical right-of-way would be approximately 280 feet, with additional right-of-way required for interchanges, service roads, and improvements to intersecting roads. In addition, between NC 273 (Southpoint Road) and I-485, there would be an auxiliary lane in each direction. Although not part of the ultimate project, if a fifth and sixth lane are needed in the future, they would be constructed to the inside, resulting in a 26-foot paved median. From west to east, interchanges would be located at I-85, US 29-74, Linwood Road (SR 1133), US 321, Robinson Road (SR 2416), NC 274 (Union Road), NC 279 (South New Hope Road), NC 273 (Southpoint Road), Dixie River Road (SR-1155), and I-485. An interchange at Bud Wilson Road (SR-2423) was proposed for all DSAs in the draft EIS, but was eliminated as part of the preferred alternative. The project would include mainline bridge crossings of Blackwood Creek, an unnamed tributary to Crowders Creek located just east of US 321, Catawba Creek, South Fork Catawba River, and Catawba River. Design refinements to the preferred alternative incorporated since the draft EIS was prepared include modifications to improve access to neighborhoods, reduce impacts, and maintain local connectivity. The mainline design speed is 70 miles per hour (mph), with a planned posted speed limit of 65 mph. Tolls would be collected by an electronic toll collection system that would involve pre-registration and use of a transponder/receiver system that would allow vehicles to move through the toll-collection locations at highway speeds. There would be no cash toll booths. For travelers who do not have a transponder, a video system would capture license plate information and the vehicles registrant would be billed. Total cost of implementing the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.28 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Gaston East-West Connector would improve east-west transportation mobility in the area around the City of Gastonia, between Gastonia and the Charlotte metropolitan area, and particularly to establish direct access between the rapidly growing areas of southeast Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 882 acres of upland forest, 4.1 acres of ponds, 7.5 acres of wetlands, and 38,894 linear feet of perennial streams. Highway right-of-way would cross 91 streams and convert 1,084 acres of prime and important farmland. Destruction of natural communities along the right-of-way would result in the loss of foraging and breeding habitats for various animal species. Right-of-way acquisition would impact 25 neighborhoods and require 348 residential relocations and 37 business relocations. Traffic noise would impact 245 receptors. Construction workers could encounter 21 to 24 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0466D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110011, Volume 1 (Final EIS and Appendices A, C-K)--343 pages, Volume 2 (Appendix B, Responses to Comments)--649 pages, Draft EIS and Additional Reports--CD-ROM, January 10, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-02-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Community Facilities KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Soils Surveys KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127707?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 10, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 5 of 29] T2 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873127669; 14767-1_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll road extending 22 miles from I-85 west of Gastonia in Gaston County to I-485, near the Charlotte-Douglas International Airport, in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The project is known both as the Gaston East-West Connector and as the Garden Parkway. Limited crossings of the Catawba River constrain travel between Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties; and within southern Gaston County, south of I-85, a lack of connecting east-west roadways makes travel circuitous and limits mobility. Congestion and frequent incidents on I-85 inhibit regional travel and diminish the ability of I-85 to function as a strategic highway corridor and intrastate corridor. Projected growth in southern Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County would further increase demand for accessibility and connectivity between the two counties. Twelve new location detailed study alternatives (DSAs) and a No-Build Alternative are evaluated in this condensed final EIS. The preferred alternative (DSA 9) would have four 12-foot travel lanes, with a 50-foot median and 12-foot paved inside and outside shoulders. The typical right-of-way would be approximately 280 feet, with additional right-of-way required for interchanges, service roads, and improvements to intersecting roads. In addition, between NC 273 (Southpoint Road) and I-485, there would be an auxiliary lane in each direction. Although not part of the ultimate project, if a fifth and sixth lane are needed in the future, they would be constructed to the inside, resulting in a 26-foot paved median. From west to east, interchanges would be located at I-85, US 29-74, Linwood Road (SR 1133), US 321, Robinson Road (SR 2416), NC 274 (Union Road), NC 279 (South New Hope Road), NC 273 (Southpoint Road), Dixie River Road (SR-1155), and I-485. An interchange at Bud Wilson Road (SR-2423) was proposed for all DSAs in the draft EIS, but was eliminated as part of the preferred alternative. The project would include mainline bridge crossings of Blackwood Creek, an unnamed tributary to Crowders Creek located just east of US 321, Catawba Creek, South Fork Catawba River, and Catawba River. Design refinements to the preferred alternative incorporated since the draft EIS was prepared include modifications to improve access to neighborhoods, reduce impacts, and maintain local connectivity. The mainline design speed is 70 miles per hour (mph), with a planned posted speed limit of 65 mph. Tolls would be collected by an electronic toll collection system that would involve pre-registration and use of a transponder/receiver system that would allow vehicles to move through the toll-collection locations at highway speeds. There would be no cash toll booths. For travelers who do not have a transponder, a video system would capture license plate information and the vehicles registrant would be billed. Total cost of implementing the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.28 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Gaston East-West Connector would improve east-west transportation mobility in the area around the City of Gastonia, between Gastonia and the Charlotte metropolitan area, and particularly to establish direct access between the rapidly growing areas of southeast Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 882 acres of upland forest, 4.1 acres of ponds, 7.5 acres of wetlands, and 38,894 linear feet of perennial streams. Highway right-of-way would cross 91 streams and convert 1,084 acres of prime and important farmland. Destruction of natural communities along the right-of-way would result in the loss of foraging and breeding habitats for various animal species. Right-of-way acquisition would impact 25 neighborhoods and require 348 residential relocations and 37 business relocations. Traffic noise would impact 245 receptors. Construction workers could encounter 21 to 24 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0466D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110011, Volume 1 (Final EIS and Appendices A, C-K)--343 pages, Volume 2 (Appendix B, Responses to Comments)--649 pages, Draft EIS and Additional Reports--CD-ROM, January 10, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-02-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Community Facilities KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Soils Surveys KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127669?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 10, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 13 of 29] T2 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873127590; 14767-1_0013 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll road extending 22 miles from I-85 west of Gastonia in Gaston County to I-485, near the Charlotte-Douglas International Airport, in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The project is known both as the Gaston East-West Connector and as the Garden Parkway. Limited crossings of the Catawba River constrain travel between Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties; and within southern Gaston County, south of I-85, a lack of connecting east-west roadways makes travel circuitous and limits mobility. Congestion and frequent incidents on I-85 inhibit regional travel and diminish the ability of I-85 to function as a strategic highway corridor and intrastate corridor. Projected growth in southern Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County would further increase demand for accessibility and connectivity between the two counties. Twelve new location detailed study alternatives (DSAs) and a No-Build Alternative are evaluated in this condensed final EIS. The preferred alternative (DSA 9) would have four 12-foot travel lanes, with a 50-foot median and 12-foot paved inside and outside shoulders. The typical right-of-way would be approximately 280 feet, with additional right-of-way required for interchanges, service roads, and improvements to intersecting roads. In addition, between NC 273 (Southpoint Road) and I-485, there would be an auxiliary lane in each direction. Although not part of the ultimate project, if a fifth and sixth lane are needed in the future, they would be constructed to the inside, resulting in a 26-foot paved median. From west to east, interchanges would be located at I-85, US 29-74, Linwood Road (SR 1133), US 321, Robinson Road (SR 2416), NC 274 (Union Road), NC 279 (South New Hope Road), NC 273 (Southpoint Road), Dixie River Road (SR-1155), and I-485. An interchange at Bud Wilson Road (SR-2423) was proposed for all DSAs in the draft EIS, but was eliminated as part of the preferred alternative. The project would include mainline bridge crossings of Blackwood Creek, an unnamed tributary to Crowders Creek located just east of US 321, Catawba Creek, South Fork Catawba River, and Catawba River. Design refinements to the preferred alternative incorporated since the draft EIS was prepared include modifications to improve access to neighborhoods, reduce impacts, and maintain local connectivity. The mainline design speed is 70 miles per hour (mph), with a planned posted speed limit of 65 mph. Tolls would be collected by an electronic toll collection system that would involve pre-registration and use of a transponder/receiver system that would allow vehicles to move through the toll-collection locations at highway speeds. There would be no cash toll booths. For travelers who do not have a transponder, a video system would capture license plate information and the vehicles registrant would be billed. Total cost of implementing the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.28 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Gaston East-West Connector would improve east-west transportation mobility in the area around the City of Gastonia, between Gastonia and the Charlotte metropolitan area, and particularly to establish direct access between the rapidly growing areas of southeast Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 882 acres of upland forest, 4.1 acres of ponds, 7.5 acres of wetlands, and 38,894 linear feet of perennial streams. Highway right-of-way would cross 91 streams and convert 1,084 acres of prime and important farmland. Destruction of natural communities along the right-of-way would result in the loss of foraging and breeding habitats for various animal species. Right-of-way acquisition would impact 25 neighborhoods and require 348 residential relocations and 37 business relocations. Traffic noise would impact 245 receptors. Construction workers could encounter 21 to 24 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0466D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110011, Volume 1 (Final EIS and Appendices A, C-K)--343 pages, Volume 2 (Appendix B, Responses to Comments)--649 pages, Draft EIS and Additional Reports--CD-ROM, January 10, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 13 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-02-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Community Facilities KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Soils Surveys KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127590?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 10, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 4 of 29] T2 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873127552; 14767-1_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll road extending 22 miles from I-85 west of Gastonia in Gaston County to I-485, near the Charlotte-Douglas International Airport, in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The project is known both as the Gaston East-West Connector and as the Garden Parkway. Limited crossings of the Catawba River constrain travel between Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties; and within southern Gaston County, south of I-85, a lack of connecting east-west roadways makes travel circuitous and limits mobility. Congestion and frequent incidents on I-85 inhibit regional travel and diminish the ability of I-85 to function as a strategic highway corridor and intrastate corridor. Projected growth in southern Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County would further increase demand for accessibility and connectivity between the two counties. Twelve new location detailed study alternatives (DSAs) and a No-Build Alternative are evaluated in this condensed final EIS. The preferred alternative (DSA 9) would have four 12-foot travel lanes, with a 50-foot median and 12-foot paved inside and outside shoulders. The typical right-of-way would be approximately 280 feet, with additional right-of-way required for interchanges, service roads, and improvements to intersecting roads. In addition, between NC 273 (Southpoint Road) and I-485, there would be an auxiliary lane in each direction. Although not part of the ultimate project, if a fifth and sixth lane are needed in the future, they would be constructed to the inside, resulting in a 26-foot paved median. From west to east, interchanges would be located at I-85, US 29-74, Linwood Road (SR 1133), US 321, Robinson Road (SR 2416), NC 274 (Union Road), NC 279 (South New Hope Road), NC 273 (Southpoint Road), Dixie River Road (SR-1155), and I-485. An interchange at Bud Wilson Road (SR-2423) was proposed for all DSAs in the draft EIS, but was eliminated as part of the preferred alternative. The project would include mainline bridge crossings of Blackwood Creek, an unnamed tributary to Crowders Creek located just east of US 321, Catawba Creek, South Fork Catawba River, and Catawba River. Design refinements to the preferred alternative incorporated since the draft EIS was prepared include modifications to improve access to neighborhoods, reduce impacts, and maintain local connectivity. The mainline design speed is 70 miles per hour (mph), with a planned posted speed limit of 65 mph. Tolls would be collected by an electronic toll collection system that would involve pre-registration and use of a transponder/receiver system that would allow vehicles to move through the toll-collection locations at highway speeds. There would be no cash toll booths. For travelers who do not have a transponder, a video system would capture license plate information and the vehicles registrant would be billed. Total cost of implementing the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.28 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Gaston East-West Connector would improve east-west transportation mobility in the area around the City of Gastonia, between Gastonia and the Charlotte metropolitan area, and particularly to establish direct access between the rapidly growing areas of southeast Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 882 acres of upland forest, 4.1 acres of ponds, 7.5 acres of wetlands, and 38,894 linear feet of perennial streams. Highway right-of-way would cross 91 streams and convert 1,084 acres of prime and important farmland. Destruction of natural communities along the right-of-way would result in the loss of foraging and breeding habitats for various animal species. Right-of-way acquisition would impact 25 neighborhoods and require 348 residential relocations and 37 business relocations. Traffic noise would impact 245 receptors. Construction workers could encounter 21 to 24 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0466D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110011, Volume 1 (Final EIS and Appendices A, C-K)--343 pages, Volume 2 (Appendix B, Responses to Comments)--649 pages, Draft EIS and Additional Reports--CD-ROM, January 10, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-02-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Community Facilities KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Soils Surveys KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127552?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 10, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 3 of 29] T2 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873127544; 14767-1_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll road extending 22 miles from I-85 west of Gastonia in Gaston County to I-485, near the Charlotte-Douglas International Airport, in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The project is known both as the Gaston East-West Connector and as the Garden Parkway. Limited crossings of the Catawba River constrain travel between Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties; and within southern Gaston County, south of I-85, a lack of connecting east-west roadways makes travel circuitous and limits mobility. Congestion and frequent incidents on I-85 inhibit regional travel and diminish the ability of I-85 to function as a strategic highway corridor and intrastate corridor. Projected growth in southern Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County would further increase demand for accessibility and connectivity between the two counties. Twelve new location detailed study alternatives (DSAs) and a No-Build Alternative are evaluated in this condensed final EIS. The preferred alternative (DSA 9) would have four 12-foot travel lanes, with a 50-foot median and 12-foot paved inside and outside shoulders. The typical right-of-way would be approximately 280 feet, with additional right-of-way required for interchanges, service roads, and improvements to intersecting roads. In addition, between NC 273 (Southpoint Road) and I-485, there would be an auxiliary lane in each direction. Although not part of the ultimate project, if a fifth and sixth lane are needed in the future, they would be constructed to the inside, resulting in a 26-foot paved median. From west to east, interchanges would be located at I-85, US 29-74, Linwood Road (SR 1133), US 321, Robinson Road (SR 2416), NC 274 (Union Road), NC 279 (South New Hope Road), NC 273 (Southpoint Road), Dixie River Road (SR-1155), and I-485. An interchange at Bud Wilson Road (SR-2423) was proposed for all DSAs in the draft EIS, but was eliminated as part of the preferred alternative. The project would include mainline bridge crossings of Blackwood Creek, an unnamed tributary to Crowders Creek located just east of US 321, Catawba Creek, South Fork Catawba River, and Catawba River. Design refinements to the preferred alternative incorporated since the draft EIS was prepared include modifications to improve access to neighborhoods, reduce impacts, and maintain local connectivity. The mainline design speed is 70 miles per hour (mph), with a planned posted speed limit of 65 mph. Tolls would be collected by an electronic toll collection system that would involve pre-registration and use of a transponder/receiver system that would allow vehicles to move through the toll-collection locations at highway speeds. There would be no cash toll booths. For travelers who do not have a transponder, a video system would capture license plate information and the vehicles registrant would be billed. Total cost of implementing the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.28 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Gaston East-West Connector would improve east-west transportation mobility in the area around the City of Gastonia, between Gastonia and the Charlotte metropolitan area, and particularly to establish direct access between the rapidly growing areas of southeast Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 882 acres of upland forest, 4.1 acres of ponds, 7.5 acres of wetlands, and 38,894 linear feet of perennial streams. Highway right-of-way would cross 91 streams and convert 1,084 acres of prime and important farmland. Destruction of natural communities along the right-of-way would result in the loss of foraging and breeding habitats for various animal species. Right-of-way acquisition would impact 25 neighborhoods and require 348 residential relocations and 37 business relocations. Traffic noise would impact 245 receptors. Construction workers could encounter 21 to 24 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0466D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110011, Volume 1 (Final EIS and Appendices A, C-K)--343 pages, Volume 2 (Appendix B, Responses to Comments)--649 pages, Draft EIS and Additional Reports--CD-ROM, January 10, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-02-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Community Facilities KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Soils Surveys KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127544?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 10, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 2 of 29] T2 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873127539; 14767-1_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll road extending 22 miles from I-85 west of Gastonia in Gaston County to I-485, near the Charlotte-Douglas International Airport, in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The project is known both as the Gaston East-West Connector and as the Garden Parkway. Limited crossings of the Catawba River constrain travel between Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties; and within southern Gaston County, south of I-85, a lack of connecting east-west roadways makes travel circuitous and limits mobility. Congestion and frequent incidents on I-85 inhibit regional travel and diminish the ability of I-85 to function as a strategic highway corridor and intrastate corridor. Projected growth in southern Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County would further increase demand for accessibility and connectivity between the two counties. Twelve new location detailed study alternatives (DSAs) and a No-Build Alternative are evaluated in this condensed final EIS. The preferred alternative (DSA 9) would have four 12-foot travel lanes, with a 50-foot median and 12-foot paved inside and outside shoulders. The typical right-of-way would be approximately 280 feet, with additional right-of-way required for interchanges, service roads, and improvements to intersecting roads. In addition, between NC 273 (Southpoint Road) and I-485, there would be an auxiliary lane in each direction. Although not part of the ultimate project, if a fifth and sixth lane are needed in the future, they would be constructed to the inside, resulting in a 26-foot paved median. From west to east, interchanges would be located at I-85, US 29-74, Linwood Road (SR 1133), US 321, Robinson Road (SR 2416), NC 274 (Union Road), NC 279 (South New Hope Road), NC 273 (Southpoint Road), Dixie River Road (SR-1155), and I-485. An interchange at Bud Wilson Road (SR-2423) was proposed for all DSAs in the draft EIS, but was eliminated as part of the preferred alternative. The project would include mainline bridge crossings of Blackwood Creek, an unnamed tributary to Crowders Creek located just east of US 321, Catawba Creek, South Fork Catawba River, and Catawba River. Design refinements to the preferred alternative incorporated since the draft EIS was prepared include modifications to improve access to neighborhoods, reduce impacts, and maintain local connectivity. The mainline design speed is 70 miles per hour (mph), with a planned posted speed limit of 65 mph. Tolls would be collected by an electronic toll collection system that would involve pre-registration and use of a transponder/receiver system that would allow vehicles to move through the toll-collection locations at highway speeds. There would be no cash toll booths. For travelers who do not have a transponder, a video system would capture license plate information and the vehicles registrant would be billed. Total cost of implementing the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.28 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Gaston East-West Connector would improve east-west transportation mobility in the area around the City of Gastonia, between Gastonia and the Charlotte metropolitan area, and particularly to establish direct access between the rapidly growing areas of southeast Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 882 acres of upland forest, 4.1 acres of ponds, 7.5 acres of wetlands, and 38,894 linear feet of perennial streams. Highway right-of-way would cross 91 streams and convert 1,084 acres of prime and important farmland. Destruction of natural communities along the right-of-way would result in the loss of foraging and breeding habitats for various animal species. Right-of-way acquisition would impact 25 neighborhoods and require 348 residential relocations and 37 business relocations. Traffic noise would impact 245 receptors. Construction workers could encounter 21 to 24 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0466D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110011, Volume 1 (Final EIS and Appendices A, C-K)--343 pages, Volume 2 (Appendix B, Responses to Comments)--649 pages, Draft EIS and Additional Reports--CD-ROM, January 10, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-02-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Community Facilities KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Soils Surveys KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127539?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 10, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 1 of 29] T2 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873127532; 14767-1_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll road extending 22 miles from I-85 west of Gastonia in Gaston County to I-485, near the Charlotte-Douglas International Airport, in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The project is known both as the Gaston East-West Connector and as the Garden Parkway. Limited crossings of the Catawba River constrain travel between Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties; and within southern Gaston County, south of I-85, a lack of connecting east-west roadways makes travel circuitous and limits mobility. Congestion and frequent incidents on I-85 inhibit regional travel and diminish the ability of I-85 to function as a strategic highway corridor and intrastate corridor. Projected growth in southern Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County would further increase demand for accessibility and connectivity between the two counties. Twelve new location detailed study alternatives (DSAs) and a No-Build Alternative are evaluated in this condensed final EIS. The preferred alternative (DSA 9) would have four 12-foot travel lanes, with a 50-foot median and 12-foot paved inside and outside shoulders. The typical right-of-way would be approximately 280 feet, with additional right-of-way required for interchanges, service roads, and improvements to intersecting roads. In addition, between NC 273 (Southpoint Road) and I-485, there would be an auxiliary lane in each direction. Although not part of the ultimate project, if a fifth and sixth lane are needed in the future, they would be constructed to the inside, resulting in a 26-foot paved median. From west to east, interchanges would be located at I-85, US 29-74, Linwood Road (SR 1133), US 321, Robinson Road (SR 2416), NC 274 (Union Road), NC 279 (South New Hope Road), NC 273 (Southpoint Road), Dixie River Road (SR-1155), and I-485. An interchange at Bud Wilson Road (SR-2423) was proposed for all DSAs in the draft EIS, but was eliminated as part of the preferred alternative. The project would include mainline bridge crossings of Blackwood Creek, an unnamed tributary to Crowders Creek located just east of US 321, Catawba Creek, South Fork Catawba River, and Catawba River. Design refinements to the preferred alternative incorporated since the draft EIS was prepared include modifications to improve access to neighborhoods, reduce impacts, and maintain local connectivity. The mainline design speed is 70 miles per hour (mph), with a planned posted speed limit of 65 mph. Tolls would be collected by an electronic toll collection system that would involve pre-registration and use of a transponder/receiver system that would allow vehicles to move through the toll-collection locations at highway speeds. There would be no cash toll booths. For travelers who do not have a transponder, a video system would capture license plate information and the vehicles registrant would be billed. Total cost of implementing the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.28 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Gaston East-West Connector would improve east-west transportation mobility in the area around the City of Gastonia, between Gastonia and the Charlotte metropolitan area, and particularly to establish direct access between the rapidly growing areas of southeast Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 882 acres of upland forest, 4.1 acres of ponds, 7.5 acres of wetlands, and 38,894 linear feet of perennial streams. Highway right-of-way would cross 91 streams and convert 1,084 acres of prime and important farmland. Destruction of natural communities along the right-of-way would result in the loss of foraging and breeding habitats for various animal species. Right-of-way acquisition would impact 25 neighborhoods and require 348 residential relocations and 37 business relocations. Traffic noise would impact 245 receptors. Construction workers could encounter 21 to 24 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0466D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110011, Volume 1 (Final EIS and Appendices A, C-K)--343 pages, Volume 2 (Appendix B, Responses to Comments)--649 pages, Draft EIS and Additional Reports--CD-ROM, January 10, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-02-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Community Facilities KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Soils Surveys KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127532?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 10, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 22 of 29] T2 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873127209; 14767-1_0022 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll road extending 22 miles from I-85 west of Gastonia in Gaston County to I-485, near the Charlotte-Douglas International Airport, in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The project is known both as the Gaston East-West Connector and as the Garden Parkway. Limited crossings of the Catawba River constrain travel between Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties; and within southern Gaston County, south of I-85, a lack of connecting east-west roadways makes travel circuitous and limits mobility. Congestion and frequent incidents on I-85 inhibit regional travel and diminish the ability of I-85 to function as a strategic highway corridor and intrastate corridor. Projected growth in southern Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County would further increase demand for accessibility and connectivity between the two counties. Twelve new location detailed study alternatives (DSAs) and a No-Build Alternative are evaluated in this condensed final EIS. The preferred alternative (DSA 9) would have four 12-foot travel lanes, with a 50-foot median and 12-foot paved inside and outside shoulders. The typical right-of-way would be approximately 280 feet, with additional right-of-way required for interchanges, service roads, and improvements to intersecting roads. In addition, between NC 273 (Southpoint Road) and I-485, there would be an auxiliary lane in each direction. Although not part of the ultimate project, if a fifth and sixth lane are needed in the future, they would be constructed to the inside, resulting in a 26-foot paved median. From west to east, interchanges would be located at I-85, US 29-74, Linwood Road (SR 1133), US 321, Robinson Road (SR 2416), NC 274 (Union Road), NC 279 (South New Hope Road), NC 273 (Southpoint Road), Dixie River Road (SR-1155), and I-485. An interchange at Bud Wilson Road (SR-2423) was proposed for all DSAs in the draft EIS, but was eliminated as part of the preferred alternative. The project would include mainline bridge crossings of Blackwood Creek, an unnamed tributary to Crowders Creek located just east of US 321, Catawba Creek, South Fork Catawba River, and Catawba River. Design refinements to the preferred alternative incorporated since the draft EIS was prepared include modifications to improve access to neighborhoods, reduce impacts, and maintain local connectivity. The mainline design speed is 70 miles per hour (mph), with a planned posted speed limit of 65 mph. Tolls would be collected by an electronic toll collection system that would involve pre-registration and use of a transponder/receiver system that would allow vehicles to move through the toll-collection locations at highway speeds. There would be no cash toll booths. For travelers who do not have a transponder, a video system would capture license plate information and the vehicles registrant would be billed. Total cost of implementing the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.28 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Gaston East-West Connector would improve east-west transportation mobility in the area around the City of Gastonia, between Gastonia and the Charlotte metropolitan area, and particularly to establish direct access between the rapidly growing areas of southeast Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 882 acres of upland forest, 4.1 acres of ponds, 7.5 acres of wetlands, and 38,894 linear feet of perennial streams. Highway right-of-way would cross 91 streams and convert 1,084 acres of prime and important farmland. Destruction of natural communities along the right-of-way would result in the loss of foraging and breeding habitats for various animal species. Right-of-way acquisition would impact 25 neighborhoods and require 348 residential relocations and 37 business relocations. Traffic noise would impact 245 receptors. Construction workers could encounter 21 to 24 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0466D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110011, Volume 1 (Final EIS and Appendices A, C-K)--343 pages, Volume 2 (Appendix B, Responses to Comments)--649 pages, Draft EIS and Additional Reports--CD-ROM, January 10, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 22 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-02-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Community Facilities KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Soils Surveys KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127209?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 10, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 8 of 29] T2 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873126599; 14767-1_0008 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll road extending 22 miles from I-85 west of Gastonia in Gaston County to I-485, near the Charlotte-Douglas International Airport, in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The project is known both as the Gaston East-West Connector and as the Garden Parkway. Limited crossings of the Catawba River constrain travel between Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties; and within southern Gaston County, south of I-85, a lack of connecting east-west roadways makes travel circuitous and limits mobility. Congestion and frequent incidents on I-85 inhibit regional travel and diminish the ability of I-85 to function as a strategic highway corridor and intrastate corridor. Projected growth in southern Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County would further increase demand for accessibility and connectivity between the two counties. Twelve new location detailed study alternatives (DSAs) and a No-Build Alternative are evaluated in this condensed final EIS. The preferred alternative (DSA 9) would have four 12-foot travel lanes, with a 50-foot median and 12-foot paved inside and outside shoulders. The typical right-of-way would be approximately 280 feet, with additional right-of-way required for interchanges, service roads, and improvements to intersecting roads. In addition, between NC 273 (Southpoint Road) and I-485, there would be an auxiliary lane in each direction. Although not part of the ultimate project, if a fifth and sixth lane are needed in the future, they would be constructed to the inside, resulting in a 26-foot paved median. From west to east, interchanges would be located at I-85, US 29-74, Linwood Road (SR 1133), US 321, Robinson Road (SR 2416), NC 274 (Union Road), NC 279 (South New Hope Road), NC 273 (Southpoint Road), Dixie River Road (SR-1155), and I-485. An interchange at Bud Wilson Road (SR-2423) was proposed for all DSAs in the draft EIS, but was eliminated as part of the preferred alternative. The project would include mainline bridge crossings of Blackwood Creek, an unnamed tributary to Crowders Creek located just east of US 321, Catawba Creek, South Fork Catawba River, and Catawba River. Design refinements to the preferred alternative incorporated since the draft EIS was prepared include modifications to improve access to neighborhoods, reduce impacts, and maintain local connectivity. The mainline design speed is 70 miles per hour (mph), with a planned posted speed limit of 65 mph. Tolls would be collected by an electronic toll collection system that would involve pre-registration and use of a transponder/receiver system that would allow vehicles to move through the toll-collection locations at highway speeds. There would be no cash toll booths. For travelers who do not have a transponder, a video system would capture license plate information and the vehicles registrant would be billed. Total cost of implementing the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.28 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Gaston East-West Connector would improve east-west transportation mobility in the area around the City of Gastonia, between Gastonia and the Charlotte metropolitan area, and particularly to establish direct access between the rapidly growing areas of southeast Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 882 acres of upland forest, 4.1 acres of ponds, 7.5 acres of wetlands, and 38,894 linear feet of perennial streams. Highway right-of-way would cross 91 streams and convert 1,084 acres of prime and important farmland. Destruction of natural communities along the right-of-way would result in the loss of foraging and breeding habitats for various animal species. Right-of-way acquisition would impact 25 neighborhoods and require 348 residential relocations and 37 business relocations. Traffic noise would impact 245 receptors. Construction workers could encounter 21 to 24 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0466D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110011, Volume 1 (Final EIS and Appendices A, C-K)--343 pages, Volume 2 (Appendix B, Responses to Comments)--649 pages, Draft EIS and Additional Reports--CD-ROM, January 10, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-02-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Community Facilities KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Soils Surveys KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126599?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 10, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 7 of 29] T2 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873126596; 14767-1_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll road extending 22 miles from I-85 west of Gastonia in Gaston County to I-485, near the Charlotte-Douglas International Airport, in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The project is known both as the Gaston East-West Connector and as the Garden Parkway. Limited crossings of the Catawba River constrain travel between Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties; and within southern Gaston County, south of I-85, a lack of connecting east-west roadways makes travel circuitous and limits mobility. Congestion and frequent incidents on I-85 inhibit regional travel and diminish the ability of I-85 to function as a strategic highway corridor and intrastate corridor. Projected growth in southern Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County would further increase demand for accessibility and connectivity between the two counties. Twelve new location detailed study alternatives (DSAs) and a No-Build Alternative are evaluated in this condensed final EIS. The preferred alternative (DSA 9) would have four 12-foot travel lanes, with a 50-foot median and 12-foot paved inside and outside shoulders. The typical right-of-way would be approximately 280 feet, with additional right-of-way required for interchanges, service roads, and improvements to intersecting roads. In addition, between NC 273 (Southpoint Road) and I-485, there would be an auxiliary lane in each direction. Although not part of the ultimate project, if a fifth and sixth lane are needed in the future, they would be constructed to the inside, resulting in a 26-foot paved median. From west to east, interchanges would be located at I-85, US 29-74, Linwood Road (SR 1133), US 321, Robinson Road (SR 2416), NC 274 (Union Road), NC 279 (South New Hope Road), NC 273 (Southpoint Road), Dixie River Road (SR-1155), and I-485. An interchange at Bud Wilson Road (SR-2423) was proposed for all DSAs in the draft EIS, but was eliminated as part of the preferred alternative. The project would include mainline bridge crossings of Blackwood Creek, an unnamed tributary to Crowders Creek located just east of US 321, Catawba Creek, South Fork Catawba River, and Catawba River. Design refinements to the preferred alternative incorporated since the draft EIS was prepared include modifications to improve access to neighborhoods, reduce impacts, and maintain local connectivity. The mainline design speed is 70 miles per hour (mph), with a planned posted speed limit of 65 mph. Tolls would be collected by an electronic toll collection system that would involve pre-registration and use of a transponder/receiver system that would allow vehicles to move through the toll-collection locations at highway speeds. There would be no cash toll booths. For travelers who do not have a transponder, a video system would capture license plate information and the vehicles registrant would be billed. Total cost of implementing the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.28 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Gaston East-West Connector would improve east-west transportation mobility in the area around the City of Gastonia, between Gastonia and the Charlotte metropolitan area, and particularly to establish direct access between the rapidly growing areas of southeast Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 882 acres of upland forest, 4.1 acres of ponds, 7.5 acres of wetlands, and 38,894 linear feet of perennial streams. Highway right-of-way would cross 91 streams and convert 1,084 acres of prime and important farmland. Destruction of natural communities along the right-of-way would result in the loss of foraging and breeding habitats for various animal species. Right-of-way acquisition would impact 25 neighborhoods and require 348 residential relocations and 37 business relocations. Traffic noise would impact 245 receptors. Construction workers could encounter 21 to 24 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0466D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110011, Volume 1 (Final EIS and Appendices A, C-K)--343 pages, Volume 2 (Appendix B, Responses to Comments)--649 pages, Draft EIS and Additional Reports--CD-ROM, January 10, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-02-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Community Facilities KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Soils Surveys KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126596?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 10, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 6 of 29] T2 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873126591; 14767-1_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll road extending 22 miles from I-85 west of Gastonia in Gaston County to I-485, near the Charlotte-Douglas International Airport, in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The project is known both as the Gaston East-West Connector and as the Garden Parkway. Limited crossings of the Catawba River constrain travel between Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties; and within southern Gaston County, south of I-85, a lack of connecting east-west roadways makes travel circuitous and limits mobility. Congestion and frequent incidents on I-85 inhibit regional travel and diminish the ability of I-85 to function as a strategic highway corridor and intrastate corridor. Projected growth in southern Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County would further increase demand for accessibility and connectivity between the two counties. Twelve new location detailed study alternatives (DSAs) and a No-Build Alternative are evaluated in this condensed final EIS. The preferred alternative (DSA 9) would have four 12-foot travel lanes, with a 50-foot median and 12-foot paved inside and outside shoulders. The typical right-of-way would be approximately 280 feet, with additional right-of-way required for interchanges, service roads, and improvements to intersecting roads. In addition, between NC 273 (Southpoint Road) and I-485, there would be an auxiliary lane in each direction. Although not part of the ultimate project, if a fifth and sixth lane are needed in the future, they would be constructed to the inside, resulting in a 26-foot paved median. From west to east, interchanges would be located at I-85, US 29-74, Linwood Road (SR 1133), US 321, Robinson Road (SR 2416), NC 274 (Union Road), NC 279 (South New Hope Road), NC 273 (Southpoint Road), Dixie River Road (SR-1155), and I-485. An interchange at Bud Wilson Road (SR-2423) was proposed for all DSAs in the draft EIS, but was eliminated as part of the preferred alternative. The project would include mainline bridge crossings of Blackwood Creek, an unnamed tributary to Crowders Creek located just east of US 321, Catawba Creek, South Fork Catawba River, and Catawba River. Design refinements to the preferred alternative incorporated since the draft EIS was prepared include modifications to improve access to neighborhoods, reduce impacts, and maintain local connectivity. The mainline design speed is 70 miles per hour (mph), with a planned posted speed limit of 65 mph. Tolls would be collected by an electronic toll collection system that would involve pre-registration and use of a transponder/receiver system that would allow vehicles to move through the toll-collection locations at highway speeds. There would be no cash toll booths. For travelers who do not have a transponder, a video system would capture license plate information and the vehicles registrant would be billed. Total cost of implementing the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.28 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Gaston East-West Connector would improve east-west transportation mobility in the area around the City of Gastonia, between Gastonia and the Charlotte metropolitan area, and particularly to establish direct access between the rapidly growing areas of southeast Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 882 acres of upland forest, 4.1 acres of ponds, 7.5 acres of wetlands, and 38,894 linear feet of perennial streams. Highway right-of-way would cross 91 streams and convert 1,084 acres of prime and important farmland. Destruction of natural communities along the right-of-way would result in the loss of foraging and breeding habitats for various animal species. Right-of-way acquisition would impact 25 neighborhoods and require 348 residential relocations and 37 business relocations. Traffic noise would impact 245 receptors. Construction workers could encounter 21 to 24 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0466D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110011, Volume 1 (Final EIS and Appendices A, C-K)--343 pages, Volume 2 (Appendix B, Responses to Comments)--649 pages, Draft EIS and Additional Reports--CD-ROM, January 10, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-02-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Community Facilities KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Soils Surveys KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126591?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 10, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT, I-85 TO I-485 AND NC 160, GASTON AND MECKLENBERG COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 854551168; 14767 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll road extending 22 miles from I-85 west of Gastonia in Gaston County to I-485, near the Charlotte-Douglas International Airport, in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The project is known both as the Gaston East-West Connector and as the Garden Parkway. Limited crossings of the Catawba River constrain travel between Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties; and within southern Gaston County, south of I-85, a lack of connecting east-west roadways makes travel circuitous and limits mobility. Congestion and frequent incidents on I-85 inhibit regional travel and diminish the ability of I-85 to function as a strategic highway corridor and intrastate corridor. Projected growth in southern Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County would further increase demand for accessibility and connectivity between the two counties. Twelve new location detailed study alternatives (DSAs) and a No-Build Alternative are evaluated in this condensed final EIS. The preferred alternative (DSA 9) would have four 12-foot travel lanes, with a 50-foot median and 12-foot paved inside and outside shoulders. The typical right-of-way would be approximately 280 feet, with additional right-of-way required for interchanges, service roads, and improvements to intersecting roads. In addition, between NC 273 (Southpoint Road) and I-485, there would be an auxiliary lane in each direction. Although not part of the ultimate project, if a fifth and sixth lane are needed in the future, they would be constructed to the inside, resulting in a 26-foot paved median. From west to east, interchanges would be located at I-85, US 29-74, Linwood Road (SR 1133), US 321, Robinson Road (SR 2416), NC 274 (Union Road), NC 279 (South New Hope Road), NC 273 (Southpoint Road), Dixie River Road (SR-1155), and I-485. An interchange at Bud Wilson Road (SR-2423) was proposed for all DSAs in the draft EIS, but was eliminated as part of the preferred alternative. The project would include mainline bridge crossings of Blackwood Creek, an unnamed tributary to Crowders Creek located just east of US 321, Catawba Creek, South Fork Catawba River, and Catawba River. Design refinements to the preferred alternative incorporated since the draft EIS was prepared include modifications to improve access to neighborhoods, reduce impacts, and maintain local connectivity. The mainline design speed is 70 miles per hour (mph), with a planned posted speed limit of 65 mph. Tolls would be collected by an electronic toll collection system that would involve pre-registration and use of a transponder/receiver system that would allow vehicles to move through the toll-collection locations at highway speeds. There would be no cash toll booths. For travelers who do not have a transponder, a video system would capture license plate information and the vehicles registrant would be billed. Total cost of implementing the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.28 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Gaston East-West Connector would improve east-west transportation mobility in the area around the City of Gastonia, between Gastonia and the Charlotte metropolitan area, and particularly to establish direct access between the rapidly growing areas of southeast Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 882 acres of upland forest, 4.1 acres of ponds, 7.5 acres of wetlands, and 38,894 linear feet of perennial streams. Highway right-of-way would cross 91 streams and convert 1,084 acres of prime and important farmland. Destruction of natural communities along the right-of-way would result in the loss of foraging and breeding habitats for various animal species. Right-of-way acquisition would impact 25 neighborhoods and require 348 residential relocations and 37 business relocations. Traffic noise would impact 245 receptors. Construction workers could encounter 21 to 24 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0466D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110011, Volume 1 (Final EIS and Appendices A, C-K)--343 pages, Volume 2 (Appendix B, Responses to Comments)--649 pages, Draft EIS and Additional Reports--CD-ROM, January 10, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-02-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Community Facilities KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Soils Surveys KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/854551168?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=GASTON+EAST-WEST+CONNECTOR+PROJECT%2C+I-85+TO+I-485+AND+NC+160%2C+GASTON+AND+MECKLENBERG+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 10, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - FUTURE I-70 KANSAS CITY METRO PROJECT, KANSAS CITY, JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI (FIRST TIER CONDENSED FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 13 of 15] T2 - FUTURE I-70 KANSAS CITY METRO PROJECT, KANSAS CITY, JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI (FIRST TIER CONDENSED FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 873127659; 14761-5_0013 AB - PURPOSE: Improvement of the Interstate 70 (I-70) corridor from the Kansas state line to east of I-470, including the Kansas City downtown loop, in Jackson County, Missouri is proposed. The 18-mile I-70 corridor and the entire downtown loop are vital to serving regional transportation needs and I-70 in the Kansas City metropolitan area (KC Metro) is also the main artery for traffic bound for major cities and towns in Missouri and the adjacent states of Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, and Illinois. I-70 is a four-lane or six-lane divided and fully access-controlled interstate facility. The study area includes all land within 100 feet of the existing highway right-of-way along the corridor and within 300 feet of the existing highway right-of-way at interchanges along I-70. An expanded study area consisting of 1,000 feet on either side of the highway including the downtown loop is being evaluated for land use and socioeconomic studies. In the five year period 2003 to 2007, 20 crashes within the study area involved a fatality. Crash rates between 2003 to 2007 exceeded 150 percent of the statewide average at the downtown loop, westbound from the Benton curve to the downtown loop, eastbound from the Jackson curve to I-435, and at the I-435 interchange. A No Build strategy and three build strategies are evaluated in this first tier condensed final EIS. For the second tier studies, the portion of I-70 under analysis here will be divided into sections of independent utility. The No Build Strategy would include maintenance activities and projects already committed as part of the statewide transportation improvement program. The Improve Key Bottlenecks strategy would include: 1) rebuilding and/or rehabilitating I-70 and the entire downtown loop with a design life of 30 to 50 years; 2) downtown loop lane balance improvements; 3) improved interchanges by addressing ramp lengths, merge areas, weave sections, and bicycle/pedestrian access; 4) interchange additions, consolidations, modifications, or eliminations to improve traffic flow and safety; 5) improvement of the Jackson and Benton curves; 6) rebuilding the I-70/I-435 interchange to provide six lanes on I-70 and six lanes on I-435 through the interchange; 7) the addition of collector distributor roads on I-70 and I-470 through the I-70/I-470 interchange; 8) integrate Operation Green Light on parallel routes; 9) improve incident management response times; and 10) enhanced I-70 express bus service, bus transit on shoulder, and park and ride lots. The Add General Lanes strategy would include the actions of the Improve Key Bottlenecks strategy and would: rehabilitate and/or rebuild I-70 with four lanes in each direction from the downtown loop to I-470; upgrade the Truman Road interchange; rebuild the I-70/I-435 interchange to provide eight lanes on I-70 and six lanes on I-435 through the interchange; and add directional ramps in the southeast and southwest corners of the downtown loop. The Transportation Improvement Corridor Strategy would include all of the parts of the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy plus a dedicated transportation corridor between the downtown loop and I-470. The transportation improvement corridor could be located between the eastbound and westbound lanes or on one side of the I-70 corridor. As currently proposed, the transportation improvement corridor would be barrier-separated from the regular traffic lanes. The transportation improvement corridor could be used for congestion-managed lanes, reversible lanes, high occupancy vehicle lanes, or bus lanes. The preferred strategy is the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy from the downtown loop to east of I-435. The preferred strategy from east of I-435 to I-470 is either the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy or the Add General Lanes Strategy. That decision will be left open to the second tier studies. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement strategy would reduce crash rates, remove key bottlenecks, reduce the potential for ramp back-up onto the freeway, improve multi-modal travel times, restore and maintain bridge and pavement conditions, increase safe access across I-70 and the downtown loop for non-motorized travel, and improve the efficiency of freight movement. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred strategy would require the relocation of 228 single-family homes, 19 multi-family buildings, 67 businesses, and four community facilities, based upon the widest strategy footprint carried forward. Three downtown parks could be affected. Impervious surface, rainwater runoff, and noise levels are expected to increase. The build strategies could have adverse effects, including increased noise, on minorities and low-income persons living along the corridor. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0147D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110005, 205 pages and maps, January 6, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 13 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-10-01-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127659?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-06&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=FUTURE+I-70+KANSAS+CITY+METRO+PROJECT%2C+KANSAS+CITY%2C+JACKSON+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI+%28FIRST+TIER+CONDENSED+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=FUTURE+I-70+KANSAS+CITY+METRO+PROJECT%2C+KANSAS+CITY%2C+JACKSON+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI+%28FIRST+TIER+CONDENSED+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 6, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - FUTURE I-70 KANSAS CITY METRO PROJECT, KANSAS CITY, JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI (FIRST TIER CONDENSED FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 12 of 15] T2 - FUTURE I-70 KANSAS CITY METRO PROJECT, KANSAS CITY, JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI (FIRST TIER CONDENSED FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 873127655; 14761-5_0012 AB - PURPOSE: Improvement of the Interstate 70 (I-70) corridor from the Kansas state line to east of I-470, including the Kansas City downtown loop, in Jackson County, Missouri is proposed. The 18-mile I-70 corridor and the entire downtown loop are vital to serving regional transportation needs and I-70 in the Kansas City metropolitan area (KC Metro) is also the main artery for traffic bound for major cities and towns in Missouri and the adjacent states of Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, and Illinois. I-70 is a four-lane or six-lane divided and fully access-controlled interstate facility. The study area includes all land within 100 feet of the existing highway right-of-way along the corridor and within 300 feet of the existing highway right-of-way at interchanges along I-70. An expanded study area consisting of 1,000 feet on either side of the highway including the downtown loop is being evaluated for land use and socioeconomic studies. In the five year period 2003 to 2007, 20 crashes within the study area involved a fatality. Crash rates between 2003 to 2007 exceeded 150 percent of the statewide average at the downtown loop, westbound from the Benton curve to the downtown loop, eastbound from the Jackson curve to I-435, and at the I-435 interchange. A No Build strategy and three build strategies are evaluated in this first tier condensed final EIS. For the second tier studies, the portion of I-70 under analysis here will be divided into sections of independent utility. The No Build Strategy would include maintenance activities and projects already committed as part of the statewide transportation improvement program. The Improve Key Bottlenecks strategy would include: 1) rebuilding and/or rehabilitating I-70 and the entire downtown loop with a design life of 30 to 50 years; 2) downtown loop lane balance improvements; 3) improved interchanges by addressing ramp lengths, merge areas, weave sections, and bicycle/pedestrian access; 4) interchange additions, consolidations, modifications, or eliminations to improve traffic flow and safety; 5) improvement of the Jackson and Benton curves; 6) rebuilding the I-70/I-435 interchange to provide six lanes on I-70 and six lanes on I-435 through the interchange; 7) the addition of collector distributor roads on I-70 and I-470 through the I-70/I-470 interchange; 8) integrate Operation Green Light on parallel routes; 9) improve incident management response times; and 10) enhanced I-70 express bus service, bus transit on shoulder, and park and ride lots. The Add General Lanes strategy would include the actions of the Improve Key Bottlenecks strategy and would: rehabilitate and/or rebuild I-70 with four lanes in each direction from the downtown loop to I-470; upgrade the Truman Road interchange; rebuild the I-70/I-435 interchange to provide eight lanes on I-70 and six lanes on I-435 through the interchange; and add directional ramps in the southeast and southwest corners of the downtown loop. The Transportation Improvement Corridor Strategy would include all of the parts of the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy plus a dedicated transportation corridor between the downtown loop and I-470. The transportation improvement corridor could be located between the eastbound and westbound lanes or on one side of the I-70 corridor. As currently proposed, the transportation improvement corridor would be barrier-separated from the regular traffic lanes. The transportation improvement corridor could be used for congestion-managed lanes, reversible lanes, high occupancy vehicle lanes, or bus lanes. The preferred strategy is the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy from the downtown loop to east of I-435. The preferred strategy from east of I-435 to I-470 is either the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy or the Add General Lanes Strategy. That decision will be left open to the second tier studies. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement strategy would reduce crash rates, remove key bottlenecks, reduce the potential for ramp back-up onto the freeway, improve multi-modal travel times, restore and maintain bridge and pavement conditions, increase safe access across I-70 and the downtown loop for non-motorized travel, and improve the efficiency of freight movement. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred strategy would require the relocation of 228 single-family homes, 19 multi-family buildings, 67 businesses, and four community facilities, based upon the widest strategy footprint carried forward. Three downtown parks could be affected. Impervious surface, rainwater runoff, and noise levels are expected to increase. The build strategies could have adverse effects, including increased noise, on minorities and low-income persons living along the corridor. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0147D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110005, 205 pages and maps, January 6, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-10-01-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127655?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-06&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=FUTURE+I-70+KANSAS+CITY+METRO+PROJECT%2C+KANSAS+CITY%2C+JACKSON+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI+%28FIRST+TIER+CONDENSED+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=FUTURE+I-70+KANSAS+CITY+METRO+PROJECT%2C+KANSAS+CITY%2C+JACKSON+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI+%28FIRST+TIER+CONDENSED+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 6, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - FUTURE I-70 KANSAS CITY METRO PROJECT, KANSAS CITY, JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI (FIRST TIER CONDENSED FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 11 of 15] T2 - FUTURE I-70 KANSAS CITY METRO PROJECT, KANSAS CITY, JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI (FIRST TIER CONDENSED FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 873127650; 14761-5_0011 AB - PURPOSE: Improvement of the Interstate 70 (I-70) corridor from the Kansas state line to east of I-470, including the Kansas City downtown loop, in Jackson County, Missouri is proposed. The 18-mile I-70 corridor and the entire downtown loop are vital to serving regional transportation needs and I-70 in the Kansas City metropolitan area (KC Metro) is also the main artery for traffic bound for major cities and towns in Missouri and the adjacent states of Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, and Illinois. I-70 is a four-lane or six-lane divided and fully access-controlled interstate facility. The study area includes all land within 100 feet of the existing highway right-of-way along the corridor and within 300 feet of the existing highway right-of-way at interchanges along I-70. An expanded study area consisting of 1,000 feet on either side of the highway including the downtown loop is being evaluated for land use and socioeconomic studies. In the five year period 2003 to 2007, 20 crashes within the study area involved a fatality. Crash rates between 2003 to 2007 exceeded 150 percent of the statewide average at the downtown loop, westbound from the Benton curve to the downtown loop, eastbound from the Jackson curve to I-435, and at the I-435 interchange. A No Build strategy and three build strategies are evaluated in this first tier condensed final EIS. For the second tier studies, the portion of I-70 under analysis here will be divided into sections of independent utility. The No Build Strategy would include maintenance activities and projects already committed as part of the statewide transportation improvement program. The Improve Key Bottlenecks strategy would include: 1) rebuilding and/or rehabilitating I-70 and the entire downtown loop with a design life of 30 to 50 years; 2) downtown loop lane balance improvements; 3) improved interchanges by addressing ramp lengths, merge areas, weave sections, and bicycle/pedestrian access; 4) interchange additions, consolidations, modifications, or eliminations to improve traffic flow and safety; 5) improvement of the Jackson and Benton curves; 6) rebuilding the I-70/I-435 interchange to provide six lanes on I-70 and six lanes on I-435 through the interchange; 7) the addition of collector distributor roads on I-70 and I-470 through the I-70/I-470 interchange; 8) integrate Operation Green Light on parallel routes; 9) improve incident management response times; and 10) enhanced I-70 express bus service, bus transit on shoulder, and park and ride lots. The Add General Lanes strategy would include the actions of the Improve Key Bottlenecks strategy and would: rehabilitate and/or rebuild I-70 with four lanes in each direction from the downtown loop to I-470; upgrade the Truman Road interchange; rebuild the I-70/I-435 interchange to provide eight lanes on I-70 and six lanes on I-435 through the interchange; and add directional ramps in the southeast and southwest corners of the downtown loop. The Transportation Improvement Corridor Strategy would include all of the parts of the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy plus a dedicated transportation corridor between the downtown loop and I-470. The transportation improvement corridor could be located between the eastbound and westbound lanes or on one side of the I-70 corridor. As currently proposed, the transportation improvement corridor would be barrier-separated from the regular traffic lanes. The transportation improvement corridor could be used for congestion-managed lanes, reversible lanes, high occupancy vehicle lanes, or bus lanes. The preferred strategy is the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy from the downtown loop to east of I-435. The preferred strategy from east of I-435 to I-470 is either the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy or the Add General Lanes Strategy. That decision will be left open to the second tier studies. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement strategy would reduce crash rates, remove key bottlenecks, reduce the potential for ramp back-up onto the freeway, improve multi-modal travel times, restore and maintain bridge and pavement conditions, increase safe access across I-70 and the downtown loop for non-motorized travel, and improve the efficiency of freight movement. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred strategy would require the relocation of 228 single-family homes, 19 multi-family buildings, 67 businesses, and four community facilities, based upon the widest strategy footprint carried forward. Three downtown parks could be affected. Impervious surface, rainwater runoff, and noise levels are expected to increase. The build strategies could have adverse effects, including increased noise, on minorities and low-income persons living along the corridor. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0147D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110005, 205 pages and maps, January 6, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-10-01-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127650?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-06&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=FUTURE+I-70+KANSAS+CITY+METRO+PROJECT%2C+KANSAS+CITY%2C+JACKSON+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI+%28FIRST+TIER+CONDENSED+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=FUTURE+I-70+KANSAS+CITY+METRO+PROJECT%2C+KANSAS+CITY%2C+JACKSON+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI+%28FIRST+TIER+CONDENSED+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 6, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - FUTURE I-70 KANSAS CITY METRO PROJECT, KANSAS CITY, JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI (FIRST TIER CONDENSED FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 10 of 15] T2 - FUTURE I-70 KANSAS CITY METRO PROJECT, KANSAS CITY, JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI (FIRST TIER CONDENSED FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 873127644; 14761-5_0010 AB - PURPOSE: Improvement of the Interstate 70 (I-70) corridor from the Kansas state line to east of I-470, including the Kansas City downtown loop, in Jackson County, Missouri is proposed. The 18-mile I-70 corridor and the entire downtown loop are vital to serving regional transportation needs and I-70 in the Kansas City metropolitan area (KC Metro) is also the main artery for traffic bound for major cities and towns in Missouri and the adjacent states of Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, and Illinois. I-70 is a four-lane or six-lane divided and fully access-controlled interstate facility. The study area includes all land within 100 feet of the existing highway right-of-way along the corridor and within 300 feet of the existing highway right-of-way at interchanges along I-70. An expanded study area consisting of 1,000 feet on either side of the highway including the downtown loop is being evaluated for land use and socioeconomic studies. In the five year period 2003 to 2007, 20 crashes within the study area involved a fatality. Crash rates between 2003 to 2007 exceeded 150 percent of the statewide average at the downtown loop, westbound from the Benton curve to the downtown loop, eastbound from the Jackson curve to I-435, and at the I-435 interchange. A No Build strategy and three build strategies are evaluated in this first tier condensed final EIS. For the second tier studies, the portion of I-70 under analysis here will be divided into sections of independent utility. The No Build Strategy would include maintenance activities and projects already committed as part of the statewide transportation improvement program. The Improve Key Bottlenecks strategy would include: 1) rebuilding and/or rehabilitating I-70 and the entire downtown loop with a design life of 30 to 50 years; 2) downtown loop lane balance improvements; 3) improved interchanges by addressing ramp lengths, merge areas, weave sections, and bicycle/pedestrian access; 4) interchange additions, consolidations, modifications, or eliminations to improve traffic flow and safety; 5) improvement of the Jackson and Benton curves; 6) rebuilding the I-70/I-435 interchange to provide six lanes on I-70 and six lanes on I-435 through the interchange; 7) the addition of collector distributor roads on I-70 and I-470 through the I-70/I-470 interchange; 8) integrate Operation Green Light on parallel routes; 9) improve incident management response times; and 10) enhanced I-70 express bus service, bus transit on shoulder, and park and ride lots. The Add General Lanes strategy would include the actions of the Improve Key Bottlenecks strategy and would: rehabilitate and/or rebuild I-70 with four lanes in each direction from the downtown loop to I-470; upgrade the Truman Road interchange; rebuild the I-70/I-435 interchange to provide eight lanes on I-70 and six lanes on I-435 through the interchange; and add directional ramps in the southeast and southwest corners of the downtown loop. The Transportation Improvement Corridor Strategy would include all of the parts of the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy plus a dedicated transportation corridor between the downtown loop and I-470. The transportation improvement corridor could be located between the eastbound and westbound lanes or on one side of the I-70 corridor. As currently proposed, the transportation improvement corridor would be barrier-separated from the regular traffic lanes. The transportation improvement corridor could be used for congestion-managed lanes, reversible lanes, high occupancy vehicle lanes, or bus lanes. The preferred strategy is the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy from the downtown loop to east of I-435. The preferred strategy from east of I-435 to I-470 is either the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy or the Add General Lanes Strategy. That decision will be left open to the second tier studies. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement strategy would reduce crash rates, remove key bottlenecks, reduce the potential for ramp back-up onto the freeway, improve multi-modal travel times, restore and maintain bridge and pavement conditions, increase safe access across I-70 and the downtown loop for non-motorized travel, and improve the efficiency of freight movement. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred strategy would require the relocation of 228 single-family homes, 19 multi-family buildings, 67 businesses, and four community facilities, based upon the widest strategy footprint carried forward. Three downtown parks could be affected. Impervious surface, rainwater runoff, and noise levels are expected to increase. The build strategies could have adverse effects, including increased noise, on minorities and low-income persons living along the corridor. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0147D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110005, 205 pages and maps, January 6, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-10-01-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127644?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-06&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=FUTURE+I-70+KANSAS+CITY+METRO+PROJECT%2C+KANSAS+CITY%2C+JACKSON+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI+%28FIRST+TIER+CONDENSED+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=FUTURE+I-70+KANSAS+CITY+METRO+PROJECT%2C+KANSAS+CITY%2C+JACKSON+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI+%28FIRST+TIER+CONDENSED+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 6, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - FUTURE I-70 KANSAS CITY METRO PROJECT, KANSAS CITY, JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI (FIRST TIER CONDENSED FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 2 of 15] T2 - FUTURE I-70 KANSAS CITY METRO PROJECT, KANSAS CITY, JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI (FIRST TIER CONDENSED FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 873127638; 14761-5_0002 AB - PURPOSE: Improvement of the Interstate 70 (I-70) corridor from the Kansas state line to east of I-470, including the Kansas City downtown loop, in Jackson County, Missouri is proposed. The 18-mile I-70 corridor and the entire downtown loop are vital to serving regional transportation needs and I-70 in the Kansas City metropolitan area (KC Metro) is also the main artery for traffic bound for major cities and towns in Missouri and the adjacent states of Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, and Illinois. I-70 is a four-lane or six-lane divided and fully access-controlled interstate facility. The study area includes all land within 100 feet of the existing highway right-of-way along the corridor and within 300 feet of the existing highway right-of-way at interchanges along I-70. An expanded study area consisting of 1,000 feet on either side of the highway including the downtown loop is being evaluated for land use and socioeconomic studies. In the five year period 2003 to 2007, 20 crashes within the study area involved a fatality. Crash rates between 2003 to 2007 exceeded 150 percent of the statewide average at the downtown loop, westbound from the Benton curve to the downtown loop, eastbound from the Jackson curve to I-435, and at the I-435 interchange. A No Build strategy and three build strategies are evaluated in this first tier condensed final EIS. For the second tier studies, the portion of I-70 under analysis here will be divided into sections of independent utility. The No Build Strategy would include maintenance activities and projects already committed as part of the statewide transportation improvement program. The Improve Key Bottlenecks strategy would include: 1) rebuilding and/or rehabilitating I-70 and the entire downtown loop with a design life of 30 to 50 years; 2) downtown loop lane balance improvements; 3) improved interchanges by addressing ramp lengths, merge areas, weave sections, and bicycle/pedestrian access; 4) interchange additions, consolidations, modifications, or eliminations to improve traffic flow and safety; 5) improvement of the Jackson and Benton curves; 6) rebuilding the I-70/I-435 interchange to provide six lanes on I-70 and six lanes on I-435 through the interchange; 7) the addition of collector distributor roads on I-70 and I-470 through the I-70/I-470 interchange; 8) integrate Operation Green Light on parallel routes; 9) improve incident management response times; and 10) enhanced I-70 express bus service, bus transit on shoulder, and park and ride lots. The Add General Lanes strategy would include the actions of the Improve Key Bottlenecks strategy and would: rehabilitate and/or rebuild I-70 with four lanes in each direction from the downtown loop to I-470; upgrade the Truman Road interchange; rebuild the I-70/I-435 interchange to provide eight lanes on I-70 and six lanes on I-435 through the interchange; and add directional ramps in the southeast and southwest corners of the downtown loop. The Transportation Improvement Corridor Strategy would include all of the parts of the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy plus a dedicated transportation corridor between the downtown loop and I-470. The transportation improvement corridor could be located between the eastbound and westbound lanes or on one side of the I-70 corridor. As currently proposed, the transportation improvement corridor would be barrier-separated from the regular traffic lanes. The transportation improvement corridor could be used for congestion-managed lanes, reversible lanes, high occupancy vehicle lanes, or bus lanes. The preferred strategy is the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy from the downtown loop to east of I-435. The preferred strategy from east of I-435 to I-470 is either the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy or the Add General Lanes Strategy. That decision will be left open to the second tier studies. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement strategy would reduce crash rates, remove key bottlenecks, reduce the potential for ramp back-up onto the freeway, improve multi-modal travel times, restore and maintain bridge and pavement conditions, increase safe access across I-70 and the downtown loop for non-motorized travel, and improve the efficiency of freight movement. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred strategy would require the relocation of 228 single-family homes, 19 multi-family buildings, 67 businesses, and four community facilities, based upon the widest strategy footprint carried forward. Three downtown parks could be affected. Impervious surface, rainwater runoff, and noise levels are expected to increase. The build strategies could have adverse effects, including increased noise, on minorities and low-income persons living along the corridor. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0147D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110005, 205 pages and maps, January 6, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-10-01-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127638?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-06&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=FUTURE+I-70+KANSAS+CITY+METRO+PROJECT%2C+KANSAS+CITY%2C+JACKSON+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI+%28FIRST+TIER+CONDENSED+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=FUTURE+I-70+KANSAS+CITY+METRO+PROJECT%2C+KANSAS+CITY%2C+JACKSON+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI+%28FIRST+TIER+CONDENSED+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 6, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - FUTURE I-70 KANSAS CITY METRO PROJECT, KANSAS CITY, JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI (FIRST TIER CONDENSED FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 1 of 15] T2 - FUTURE I-70 KANSAS CITY METRO PROJECT, KANSAS CITY, JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI (FIRST TIER CONDENSED FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 873127634; 14761-5_0001 AB - PURPOSE: Improvement of the Interstate 70 (I-70) corridor from the Kansas state line to east of I-470, including the Kansas City downtown loop, in Jackson County, Missouri is proposed. The 18-mile I-70 corridor and the entire downtown loop are vital to serving regional transportation needs and I-70 in the Kansas City metropolitan area (KC Metro) is also the main artery for traffic bound for major cities and towns in Missouri and the adjacent states of Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, and Illinois. I-70 is a four-lane or six-lane divided and fully access-controlled interstate facility. The study area includes all land within 100 feet of the existing highway right-of-way along the corridor and within 300 feet of the existing highway right-of-way at interchanges along I-70. An expanded study area consisting of 1,000 feet on either side of the highway including the downtown loop is being evaluated for land use and socioeconomic studies. In the five year period 2003 to 2007, 20 crashes within the study area involved a fatality. Crash rates between 2003 to 2007 exceeded 150 percent of the statewide average at the downtown loop, westbound from the Benton curve to the downtown loop, eastbound from the Jackson curve to I-435, and at the I-435 interchange. A No Build strategy and three build strategies are evaluated in this first tier condensed final EIS. For the second tier studies, the portion of I-70 under analysis here will be divided into sections of independent utility. The No Build Strategy would include maintenance activities and projects already committed as part of the statewide transportation improvement program. The Improve Key Bottlenecks strategy would include: 1) rebuilding and/or rehabilitating I-70 and the entire downtown loop with a design life of 30 to 50 years; 2) downtown loop lane balance improvements; 3) improved interchanges by addressing ramp lengths, merge areas, weave sections, and bicycle/pedestrian access; 4) interchange additions, consolidations, modifications, or eliminations to improve traffic flow and safety; 5) improvement of the Jackson and Benton curves; 6) rebuilding the I-70/I-435 interchange to provide six lanes on I-70 and six lanes on I-435 through the interchange; 7) the addition of collector distributor roads on I-70 and I-470 through the I-70/I-470 interchange; 8) integrate Operation Green Light on parallel routes; 9) improve incident management response times; and 10) enhanced I-70 express bus service, bus transit on shoulder, and park and ride lots. The Add General Lanes strategy would include the actions of the Improve Key Bottlenecks strategy and would: rehabilitate and/or rebuild I-70 with four lanes in each direction from the downtown loop to I-470; upgrade the Truman Road interchange; rebuild the I-70/I-435 interchange to provide eight lanes on I-70 and six lanes on I-435 through the interchange; and add directional ramps in the southeast and southwest corners of the downtown loop. The Transportation Improvement Corridor Strategy would include all of the parts of the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy plus a dedicated transportation corridor between the downtown loop and I-470. The transportation improvement corridor could be located between the eastbound and westbound lanes or on one side of the I-70 corridor. As currently proposed, the transportation improvement corridor would be barrier-separated from the regular traffic lanes. The transportation improvement corridor could be used for congestion-managed lanes, reversible lanes, high occupancy vehicle lanes, or bus lanes. The preferred strategy is the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy from the downtown loop to east of I-435. The preferred strategy from east of I-435 to I-470 is either the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy or the Add General Lanes Strategy. That decision will be left open to the second tier studies. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement strategy would reduce crash rates, remove key bottlenecks, reduce the potential for ramp back-up onto the freeway, improve multi-modal travel times, restore and maintain bridge and pavement conditions, increase safe access across I-70 and the downtown loop for non-motorized travel, and improve the efficiency of freight movement. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred strategy would require the relocation of 228 single-family homes, 19 multi-family buildings, 67 businesses, and four community facilities, based upon the widest strategy footprint carried forward. Three downtown parks could be affected. Impervious surface, rainwater runoff, and noise levels are expected to increase. The build strategies could have adverse effects, including increased noise, on minorities and low-income persons living along the corridor. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0147D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110005, 205 pages and maps, January 6, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-10-01-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127634?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-06&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=FUTURE+I-70+KANSAS+CITY+METRO+PROJECT%2C+KANSAS+CITY%2C+JACKSON+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI+%28FIRST+TIER+CONDENSED+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=FUTURE+I-70+KANSAS+CITY+METRO+PROJECT%2C+KANSAS+CITY%2C+JACKSON+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI+%28FIRST+TIER+CONDENSED+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 6, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - FUTURE I-70 KANSAS CITY METRO PROJECT, KANSAS CITY, JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI (FIRST TIER CONDENSED FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 15 of 15] T2 - FUTURE I-70 KANSAS CITY METRO PROJECT, KANSAS CITY, JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI (FIRST TIER CONDENSED FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 873127084; 14761-5_0015 AB - PURPOSE: Improvement of the Interstate 70 (I-70) corridor from the Kansas state line to east of I-470, including the Kansas City downtown loop, in Jackson County, Missouri is proposed. The 18-mile I-70 corridor and the entire downtown loop are vital to serving regional transportation needs and I-70 in the Kansas City metropolitan area (KC Metro) is also the main artery for traffic bound for major cities and towns in Missouri and the adjacent states of Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, and Illinois. I-70 is a four-lane or six-lane divided and fully access-controlled interstate facility. The study area includes all land within 100 feet of the existing highway right-of-way along the corridor and within 300 feet of the existing highway right-of-way at interchanges along I-70. An expanded study area consisting of 1,000 feet on either side of the highway including the downtown loop is being evaluated for land use and socioeconomic studies. In the five year period 2003 to 2007, 20 crashes within the study area involved a fatality. Crash rates between 2003 to 2007 exceeded 150 percent of the statewide average at the downtown loop, westbound from the Benton curve to the downtown loop, eastbound from the Jackson curve to I-435, and at the I-435 interchange. A No Build strategy and three build strategies are evaluated in this first tier condensed final EIS. For the second tier studies, the portion of I-70 under analysis here will be divided into sections of independent utility. The No Build Strategy would include maintenance activities and projects already committed as part of the statewide transportation improvement program. The Improve Key Bottlenecks strategy would include: 1) rebuilding and/or rehabilitating I-70 and the entire downtown loop with a design life of 30 to 50 years; 2) downtown loop lane balance improvements; 3) improved interchanges by addressing ramp lengths, merge areas, weave sections, and bicycle/pedestrian access; 4) interchange additions, consolidations, modifications, or eliminations to improve traffic flow and safety; 5) improvement of the Jackson and Benton curves; 6) rebuilding the I-70/I-435 interchange to provide six lanes on I-70 and six lanes on I-435 through the interchange; 7) the addition of collector distributor roads on I-70 and I-470 through the I-70/I-470 interchange; 8) integrate Operation Green Light on parallel routes; 9) improve incident management response times; and 10) enhanced I-70 express bus service, bus transit on shoulder, and park and ride lots. The Add General Lanes strategy would include the actions of the Improve Key Bottlenecks strategy and would: rehabilitate and/or rebuild I-70 with four lanes in each direction from the downtown loop to I-470; upgrade the Truman Road interchange; rebuild the I-70/I-435 interchange to provide eight lanes on I-70 and six lanes on I-435 through the interchange; and add directional ramps in the southeast and southwest corners of the downtown loop. The Transportation Improvement Corridor Strategy would include all of the parts of the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy plus a dedicated transportation corridor between the downtown loop and I-470. The transportation improvement corridor could be located between the eastbound and westbound lanes or on one side of the I-70 corridor. As currently proposed, the transportation improvement corridor would be barrier-separated from the regular traffic lanes. The transportation improvement corridor could be used for congestion-managed lanes, reversible lanes, high occupancy vehicle lanes, or bus lanes. The preferred strategy is the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy from the downtown loop to east of I-435. The preferred strategy from east of I-435 to I-470 is either the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy or the Add General Lanes Strategy. That decision will be left open to the second tier studies. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement strategy would reduce crash rates, remove key bottlenecks, reduce the potential for ramp back-up onto the freeway, improve multi-modal travel times, restore and maintain bridge and pavement conditions, increase safe access across I-70 and the downtown loop for non-motorized travel, and improve the efficiency of freight movement. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred strategy would require the relocation of 228 single-family homes, 19 multi-family buildings, 67 businesses, and four community facilities, based upon the widest strategy footprint carried forward. Three downtown parks could be affected. Impervious surface, rainwater runoff, and noise levels are expected to increase. The build strategies could have adverse effects, including increased noise, on minorities and low-income persons living along the corridor. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0147D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110005, 205 pages and maps, January 6, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-10-01-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127084?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-06&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=FUTURE+I-70+KANSAS+CITY+METRO+PROJECT%2C+KANSAS+CITY%2C+JACKSON+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI+%28FIRST+TIER+CONDENSED+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=FUTURE+I-70+KANSAS+CITY+METRO+PROJECT%2C+KANSAS+CITY%2C+JACKSON+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI+%28FIRST+TIER+CONDENSED+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 6, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - FUTURE I-70 KANSAS CITY METRO PROJECT, KANSAS CITY, JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI (FIRST TIER CONDENSED FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 14 of 15] T2 - FUTURE I-70 KANSAS CITY METRO PROJECT, KANSAS CITY, JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI (FIRST TIER CONDENSED FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 873127080; 14761-5_0014 AB - PURPOSE: Improvement of the Interstate 70 (I-70) corridor from the Kansas state line to east of I-470, including the Kansas City downtown loop, in Jackson County, Missouri is proposed. The 18-mile I-70 corridor and the entire downtown loop are vital to serving regional transportation needs and I-70 in the Kansas City metropolitan area (KC Metro) is also the main artery for traffic bound for major cities and towns in Missouri and the adjacent states of Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, and Illinois. I-70 is a four-lane or six-lane divided and fully access-controlled interstate facility. The study area includes all land within 100 feet of the existing highway right-of-way along the corridor and within 300 feet of the existing highway right-of-way at interchanges along I-70. An expanded study area consisting of 1,000 feet on either side of the highway including the downtown loop is being evaluated for land use and socioeconomic studies. In the five year period 2003 to 2007, 20 crashes within the study area involved a fatality. Crash rates between 2003 to 2007 exceeded 150 percent of the statewide average at the downtown loop, westbound from the Benton curve to the downtown loop, eastbound from the Jackson curve to I-435, and at the I-435 interchange. A No Build strategy and three build strategies are evaluated in this first tier condensed final EIS. For the second tier studies, the portion of I-70 under analysis here will be divided into sections of independent utility. The No Build Strategy would include maintenance activities and projects already committed as part of the statewide transportation improvement program. The Improve Key Bottlenecks strategy would include: 1) rebuilding and/or rehabilitating I-70 and the entire downtown loop with a design life of 30 to 50 years; 2) downtown loop lane balance improvements; 3) improved interchanges by addressing ramp lengths, merge areas, weave sections, and bicycle/pedestrian access; 4) interchange additions, consolidations, modifications, or eliminations to improve traffic flow and safety; 5) improvement of the Jackson and Benton curves; 6) rebuilding the I-70/I-435 interchange to provide six lanes on I-70 and six lanes on I-435 through the interchange; 7) the addition of collector distributor roads on I-70 and I-470 through the I-70/I-470 interchange; 8) integrate Operation Green Light on parallel routes; 9) improve incident management response times; and 10) enhanced I-70 express bus service, bus transit on shoulder, and park and ride lots. The Add General Lanes strategy would include the actions of the Improve Key Bottlenecks strategy and would: rehabilitate and/or rebuild I-70 with four lanes in each direction from the downtown loop to I-470; upgrade the Truman Road interchange; rebuild the I-70/I-435 interchange to provide eight lanes on I-70 and six lanes on I-435 through the interchange; and add directional ramps in the southeast and southwest corners of the downtown loop. The Transportation Improvement Corridor Strategy would include all of the parts of the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy plus a dedicated transportation corridor between the downtown loop and I-470. The transportation improvement corridor could be located between the eastbound and westbound lanes or on one side of the I-70 corridor. As currently proposed, the transportation improvement corridor would be barrier-separated from the regular traffic lanes. The transportation improvement corridor could be used for congestion-managed lanes, reversible lanes, high occupancy vehicle lanes, or bus lanes. The preferred strategy is the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy from the downtown loop to east of I-435. The preferred strategy from east of I-435 to I-470 is either the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy or the Add General Lanes Strategy. That decision will be left open to the second tier studies. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement strategy would reduce crash rates, remove key bottlenecks, reduce the potential for ramp back-up onto the freeway, improve multi-modal travel times, restore and maintain bridge and pavement conditions, increase safe access across I-70 and the downtown loop for non-motorized travel, and improve the efficiency of freight movement. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred strategy would require the relocation of 228 single-family homes, 19 multi-family buildings, 67 businesses, and four community facilities, based upon the widest strategy footprint carried forward. Three downtown parks could be affected. Impervious surface, rainwater runoff, and noise levels are expected to increase. The build strategies could have adverse effects, including increased noise, on minorities and low-income persons living along the corridor. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0147D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110005, 205 pages and maps, January 6, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-10-01-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127080?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-06&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=FUTURE+I-70+KANSAS+CITY+METRO+PROJECT%2C+KANSAS+CITY%2C+JACKSON+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI+%28FIRST+TIER+CONDENSED+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=FUTURE+I-70+KANSAS+CITY+METRO+PROJECT%2C+KANSAS+CITY%2C+JACKSON+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI+%28FIRST+TIER+CONDENSED+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 6, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - FUTURE I-70 KANSAS CITY METRO PROJECT, KANSAS CITY, JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI (FIRST TIER CONDENSED FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 9 of 15] T2 - FUTURE I-70 KANSAS CITY METRO PROJECT, KANSAS CITY, JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI (FIRST TIER CONDENSED FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 873127077; 14761-5_0009 AB - PURPOSE: Improvement of the Interstate 70 (I-70) corridor from the Kansas state line to east of I-470, including the Kansas City downtown loop, in Jackson County, Missouri is proposed. The 18-mile I-70 corridor and the entire downtown loop are vital to serving regional transportation needs and I-70 in the Kansas City metropolitan area (KC Metro) is also the main artery for traffic bound for major cities and towns in Missouri and the adjacent states of Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, and Illinois. I-70 is a four-lane or six-lane divided and fully access-controlled interstate facility. The study area includes all land within 100 feet of the existing highway right-of-way along the corridor and within 300 feet of the existing highway right-of-way at interchanges along I-70. An expanded study area consisting of 1,000 feet on either side of the highway including the downtown loop is being evaluated for land use and socioeconomic studies. In the five year period 2003 to 2007, 20 crashes within the study area involved a fatality. Crash rates between 2003 to 2007 exceeded 150 percent of the statewide average at the downtown loop, westbound from the Benton curve to the downtown loop, eastbound from the Jackson curve to I-435, and at the I-435 interchange. A No Build strategy and three build strategies are evaluated in this first tier condensed final EIS. For the second tier studies, the portion of I-70 under analysis here will be divided into sections of independent utility. The No Build Strategy would include maintenance activities and projects already committed as part of the statewide transportation improvement program. The Improve Key Bottlenecks strategy would include: 1) rebuilding and/or rehabilitating I-70 and the entire downtown loop with a design life of 30 to 50 years; 2) downtown loop lane balance improvements; 3) improved interchanges by addressing ramp lengths, merge areas, weave sections, and bicycle/pedestrian access; 4) interchange additions, consolidations, modifications, or eliminations to improve traffic flow and safety; 5) improvement of the Jackson and Benton curves; 6) rebuilding the I-70/I-435 interchange to provide six lanes on I-70 and six lanes on I-435 through the interchange; 7) the addition of collector distributor roads on I-70 and I-470 through the I-70/I-470 interchange; 8) integrate Operation Green Light on parallel routes; 9) improve incident management response times; and 10) enhanced I-70 express bus service, bus transit on shoulder, and park and ride lots. The Add General Lanes strategy would include the actions of the Improve Key Bottlenecks strategy and would: rehabilitate and/or rebuild I-70 with four lanes in each direction from the downtown loop to I-470; upgrade the Truman Road interchange; rebuild the I-70/I-435 interchange to provide eight lanes on I-70 and six lanes on I-435 through the interchange; and add directional ramps in the southeast and southwest corners of the downtown loop. The Transportation Improvement Corridor Strategy would include all of the parts of the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy plus a dedicated transportation corridor between the downtown loop and I-470. The transportation improvement corridor could be located between the eastbound and westbound lanes or on one side of the I-70 corridor. As currently proposed, the transportation improvement corridor would be barrier-separated from the regular traffic lanes. The transportation improvement corridor could be used for congestion-managed lanes, reversible lanes, high occupancy vehicle lanes, or bus lanes. The preferred strategy is the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy from the downtown loop to east of I-435. The preferred strategy from east of I-435 to I-470 is either the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy or the Add General Lanes Strategy. That decision will be left open to the second tier studies. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement strategy would reduce crash rates, remove key bottlenecks, reduce the potential for ramp back-up onto the freeway, improve multi-modal travel times, restore and maintain bridge and pavement conditions, increase safe access across I-70 and the downtown loop for non-motorized travel, and improve the efficiency of freight movement. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred strategy would require the relocation of 228 single-family homes, 19 multi-family buildings, 67 businesses, and four community facilities, based upon the widest strategy footprint carried forward. Three downtown parks could be affected. Impervious surface, rainwater runoff, and noise levels are expected to increase. The build strategies could have adverse effects, including increased noise, on minorities and low-income persons living along the corridor. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0147D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110005, 205 pages and maps, January 6, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-10-01-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127077?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-06&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=FUTURE+I-70+KANSAS+CITY+METRO+PROJECT%2C+KANSAS+CITY%2C+JACKSON+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI+%28FIRST+TIER+CONDENSED+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=FUTURE+I-70+KANSAS+CITY+METRO+PROJECT%2C+KANSAS+CITY%2C+JACKSON+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI+%28FIRST+TIER+CONDENSED+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 6, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - FUTURE I-70 KANSAS CITY METRO PROJECT, KANSAS CITY, JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI (FIRST TIER CONDENSED FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 8 of 15] T2 - FUTURE I-70 KANSAS CITY METRO PROJECT, KANSAS CITY, JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI (FIRST TIER CONDENSED FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 873127074; 14761-5_0008 AB - PURPOSE: Improvement of the Interstate 70 (I-70) corridor from the Kansas state line to east of I-470, including the Kansas City downtown loop, in Jackson County, Missouri is proposed. The 18-mile I-70 corridor and the entire downtown loop are vital to serving regional transportation needs and I-70 in the Kansas City metropolitan area (KC Metro) is also the main artery for traffic bound for major cities and towns in Missouri and the adjacent states of Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, and Illinois. I-70 is a four-lane or six-lane divided and fully access-controlled interstate facility. The study area includes all land within 100 feet of the existing highway right-of-way along the corridor and within 300 feet of the existing highway right-of-way at interchanges along I-70. An expanded study area consisting of 1,000 feet on either side of the highway including the downtown loop is being evaluated for land use and socioeconomic studies. In the five year period 2003 to 2007, 20 crashes within the study area involved a fatality. Crash rates between 2003 to 2007 exceeded 150 percent of the statewide average at the downtown loop, westbound from the Benton curve to the downtown loop, eastbound from the Jackson curve to I-435, and at the I-435 interchange. A No Build strategy and three build strategies are evaluated in this first tier condensed final EIS. For the second tier studies, the portion of I-70 under analysis here will be divided into sections of independent utility. The No Build Strategy would include maintenance activities and projects already committed as part of the statewide transportation improvement program. The Improve Key Bottlenecks strategy would include: 1) rebuilding and/or rehabilitating I-70 and the entire downtown loop with a design life of 30 to 50 years; 2) downtown loop lane balance improvements; 3) improved interchanges by addressing ramp lengths, merge areas, weave sections, and bicycle/pedestrian access; 4) interchange additions, consolidations, modifications, or eliminations to improve traffic flow and safety; 5) improvement of the Jackson and Benton curves; 6) rebuilding the I-70/I-435 interchange to provide six lanes on I-70 and six lanes on I-435 through the interchange; 7) the addition of collector distributor roads on I-70 and I-470 through the I-70/I-470 interchange; 8) integrate Operation Green Light on parallel routes; 9) improve incident management response times; and 10) enhanced I-70 express bus service, bus transit on shoulder, and park and ride lots. The Add General Lanes strategy would include the actions of the Improve Key Bottlenecks strategy and would: rehabilitate and/or rebuild I-70 with four lanes in each direction from the downtown loop to I-470; upgrade the Truman Road interchange; rebuild the I-70/I-435 interchange to provide eight lanes on I-70 and six lanes on I-435 through the interchange; and add directional ramps in the southeast and southwest corners of the downtown loop. The Transportation Improvement Corridor Strategy would include all of the parts of the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy plus a dedicated transportation corridor between the downtown loop and I-470. The transportation improvement corridor could be located between the eastbound and westbound lanes or on one side of the I-70 corridor. As currently proposed, the transportation improvement corridor would be barrier-separated from the regular traffic lanes. The transportation improvement corridor could be used for congestion-managed lanes, reversible lanes, high occupancy vehicle lanes, or bus lanes. The preferred strategy is the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy from the downtown loop to east of I-435. The preferred strategy from east of I-435 to I-470 is either the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy or the Add General Lanes Strategy. That decision will be left open to the second tier studies. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement strategy would reduce crash rates, remove key bottlenecks, reduce the potential for ramp back-up onto the freeway, improve multi-modal travel times, restore and maintain bridge and pavement conditions, increase safe access across I-70 and the downtown loop for non-motorized travel, and improve the efficiency of freight movement. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred strategy would require the relocation of 228 single-family homes, 19 multi-family buildings, 67 businesses, and four community facilities, based upon the widest strategy footprint carried forward. Three downtown parks could be affected. Impervious surface, rainwater runoff, and noise levels are expected to increase. The build strategies could have adverse effects, including increased noise, on minorities and low-income persons living along the corridor. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0147D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110005, 205 pages and maps, January 6, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-10-01-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127074?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-06&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=FUTURE+I-70+KANSAS+CITY+METRO+PROJECT%2C+KANSAS+CITY%2C+JACKSON+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI+%28FIRST+TIER+CONDENSED+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=FUTURE+I-70+KANSAS+CITY+METRO+PROJECT%2C+KANSAS+CITY%2C+JACKSON+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI+%28FIRST+TIER+CONDENSED+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 6, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - FUTURE I-70 KANSAS CITY METRO PROJECT, KANSAS CITY, JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI (FIRST TIER CONDENSED FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 7 of 15] T2 - FUTURE I-70 KANSAS CITY METRO PROJECT, KANSAS CITY, JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI (FIRST TIER CONDENSED FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 873127069; 14761-5_0007 AB - PURPOSE: Improvement of the Interstate 70 (I-70) corridor from the Kansas state line to east of I-470, including the Kansas City downtown loop, in Jackson County, Missouri is proposed. The 18-mile I-70 corridor and the entire downtown loop are vital to serving regional transportation needs and I-70 in the Kansas City metropolitan area (KC Metro) is also the main artery for traffic bound for major cities and towns in Missouri and the adjacent states of Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, and Illinois. I-70 is a four-lane or six-lane divided and fully access-controlled interstate facility. The study area includes all land within 100 feet of the existing highway right-of-way along the corridor and within 300 feet of the existing highway right-of-way at interchanges along I-70. An expanded study area consisting of 1,000 feet on either side of the highway including the downtown loop is being evaluated for land use and socioeconomic studies. In the five year period 2003 to 2007, 20 crashes within the study area involved a fatality. Crash rates between 2003 to 2007 exceeded 150 percent of the statewide average at the downtown loop, westbound from the Benton curve to the downtown loop, eastbound from the Jackson curve to I-435, and at the I-435 interchange. A No Build strategy and three build strategies are evaluated in this first tier condensed final EIS. For the second tier studies, the portion of I-70 under analysis here will be divided into sections of independent utility. The No Build Strategy would include maintenance activities and projects already committed as part of the statewide transportation improvement program. The Improve Key Bottlenecks strategy would include: 1) rebuilding and/or rehabilitating I-70 and the entire downtown loop with a design life of 30 to 50 years; 2) downtown loop lane balance improvements; 3) improved interchanges by addressing ramp lengths, merge areas, weave sections, and bicycle/pedestrian access; 4) interchange additions, consolidations, modifications, or eliminations to improve traffic flow and safety; 5) improvement of the Jackson and Benton curves; 6) rebuilding the I-70/I-435 interchange to provide six lanes on I-70 and six lanes on I-435 through the interchange; 7) the addition of collector distributor roads on I-70 and I-470 through the I-70/I-470 interchange; 8) integrate Operation Green Light on parallel routes; 9) improve incident management response times; and 10) enhanced I-70 express bus service, bus transit on shoulder, and park and ride lots. The Add General Lanes strategy would include the actions of the Improve Key Bottlenecks strategy and would: rehabilitate and/or rebuild I-70 with four lanes in each direction from the downtown loop to I-470; upgrade the Truman Road interchange; rebuild the I-70/I-435 interchange to provide eight lanes on I-70 and six lanes on I-435 through the interchange; and add directional ramps in the southeast and southwest corners of the downtown loop. The Transportation Improvement Corridor Strategy would include all of the parts of the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy plus a dedicated transportation corridor between the downtown loop and I-470. The transportation improvement corridor could be located between the eastbound and westbound lanes or on one side of the I-70 corridor. As currently proposed, the transportation improvement corridor would be barrier-separated from the regular traffic lanes. The transportation improvement corridor could be used for congestion-managed lanes, reversible lanes, high occupancy vehicle lanes, or bus lanes. The preferred strategy is the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy from the downtown loop to east of I-435. The preferred strategy from east of I-435 to I-470 is either the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy or the Add General Lanes Strategy. That decision will be left open to the second tier studies. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement strategy would reduce crash rates, remove key bottlenecks, reduce the potential for ramp back-up onto the freeway, improve multi-modal travel times, restore and maintain bridge and pavement conditions, increase safe access across I-70 and the downtown loop for non-motorized travel, and improve the efficiency of freight movement. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred strategy would require the relocation of 228 single-family homes, 19 multi-family buildings, 67 businesses, and four community facilities, based upon the widest strategy footprint carried forward. Three downtown parks could be affected. Impervious surface, rainwater runoff, and noise levels are expected to increase. The build strategies could have adverse effects, including increased noise, on minorities and low-income persons living along the corridor. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0147D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110005, 205 pages and maps, January 6, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-10-01-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127069?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-06&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=FUTURE+I-70+KANSAS+CITY+METRO+PROJECT%2C+KANSAS+CITY%2C+JACKSON+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI+%28FIRST+TIER+CONDENSED+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=FUTURE+I-70+KANSAS+CITY+METRO+PROJECT%2C+KANSAS+CITY%2C+JACKSON+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI+%28FIRST+TIER+CONDENSED+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 6, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - FUTURE I-70 KANSAS CITY METRO PROJECT, KANSAS CITY, JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI (FIRST TIER CONDENSED FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 6 of 15] T2 - FUTURE I-70 KANSAS CITY METRO PROJECT, KANSAS CITY, JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI (FIRST TIER CONDENSED FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 873127067; 14761-5_0006 AB - PURPOSE: Improvement of the Interstate 70 (I-70) corridor from the Kansas state line to east of I-470, including the Kansas City downtown loop, in Jackson County, Missouri is proposed. The 18-mile I-70 corridor and the entire downtown loop are vital to serving regional transportation needs and I-70 in the Kansas City metropolitan area (KC Metro) is also the main artery for traffic bound for major cities and towns in Missouri and the adjacent states of Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, and Illinois. I-70 is a four-lane or six-lane divided and fully access-controlled interstate facility. The study area includes all land within 100 feet of the existing highway right-of-way along the corridor and within 300 feet of the existing highway right-of-way at interchanges along I-70. An expanded study area consisting of 1,000 feet on either side of the highway including the downtown loop is being evaluated for land use and socioeconomic studies. In the five year period 2003 to 2007, 20 crashes within the study area involved a fatality. Crash rates between 2003 to 2007 exceeded 150 percent of the statewide average at the downtown loop, westbound from the Benton curve to the downtown loop, eastbound from the Jackson curve to I-435, and at the I-435 interchange. A No Build strategy and three build strategies are evaluated in this first tier condensed final EIS. For the second tier studies, the portion of I-70 under analysis here will be divided into sections of independent utility. The No Build Strategy would include maintenance activities and projects already committed as part of the statewide transportation improvement program. The Improve Key Bottlenecks strategy would include: 1) rebuilding and/or rehabilitating I-70 and the entire downtown loop with a design life of 30 to 50 years; 2) downtown loop lane balance improvements; 3) improved interchanges by addressing ramp lengths, merge areas, weave sections, and bicycle/pedestrian access; 4) interchange additions, consolidations, modifications, or eliminations to improve traffic flow and safety; 5) improvement of the Jackson and Benton curves; 6) rebuilding the I-70/I-435 interchange to provide six lanes on I-70 and six lanes on I-435 through the interchange; 7) the addition of collector distributor roads on I-70 and I-470 through the I-70/I-470 interchange; 8) integrate Operation Green Light on parallel routes; 9) improve incident management response times; and 10) enhanced I-70 express bus service, bus transit on shoulder, and park and ride lots. The Add General Lanes strategy would include the actions of the Improve Key Bottlenecks strategy and would: rehabilitate and/or rebuild I-70 with four lanes in each direction from the downtown loop to I-470; upgrade the Truman Road interchange; rebuild the I-70/I-435 interchange to provide eight lanes on I-70 and six lanes on I-435 through the interchange; and add directional ramps in the southeast and southwest corners of the downtown loop. The Transportation Improvement Corridor Strategy would include all of the parts of the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy plus a dedicated transportation corridor between the downtown loop and I-470. The transportation improvement corridor could be located between the eastbound and westbound lanes or on one side of the I-70 corridor. As currently proposed, the transportation improvement corridor would be barrier-separated from the regular traffic lanes. The transportation improvement corridor could be used for congestion-managed lanes, reversible lanes, high occupancy vehicle lanes, or bus lanes. The preferred strategy is the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy from the downtown loop to east of I-435. The preferred strategy from east of I-435 to I-470 is either the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy or the Add General Lanes Strategy. That decision will be left open to the second tier studies. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement strategy would reduce crash rates, remove key bottlenecks, reduce the potential for ramp back-up onto the freeway, improve multi-modal travel times, restore and maintain bridge and pavement conditions, increase safe access across I-70 and the downtown loop for non-motorized travel, and improve the efficiency of freight movement. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred strategy would require the relocation of 228 single-family homes, 19 multi-family buildings, 67 businesses, and four community facilities, based upon the widest strategy footprint carried forward. Three downtown parks could be affected. Impervious surface, rainwater runoff, and noise levels are expected to increase. The build strategies could have adverse effects, including increased noise, on minorities and low-income persons living along the corridor. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0147D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110005, 205 pages and maps, January 6, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-10-01-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127067?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-06&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=FUTURE+I-70+KANSAS+CITY+METRO+PROJECT%2C+KANSAS+CITY%2C+JACKSON+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI+%28FIRST+TIER+CONDENSED+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=FUTURE+I-70+KANSAS+CITY+METRO+PROJECT%2C+KANSAS+CITY%2C+JACKSON+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI+%28FIRST+TIER+CONDENSED+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 6, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - FUTURE I-70 KANSAS CITY METRO PROJECT, KANSAS CITY, JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI (FIRST TIER CONDENSED FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 5 of 15] T2 - FUTURE I-70 KANSAS CITY METRO PROJECT, KANSAS CITY, JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI (FIRST TIER CONDENSED FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 873127061; 14761-5_0005 AB - PURPOSE: Improvement of the Interstate 70 (I-70) corridor from the Kansas state line to east of I-470, including the Kansas City downtown loop, in Jackson County, Missouri is proposed. The 18-mile I-70 corridor and the entire downtown loop are vital to serving regional transportation needs and I-70 in the Kansas City metropolitan area (KC Metro) is also the main artery for traffic bound for major cities and towns in Missouri and the adjacent states of Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, and Illinois. I-70 is a four-lane or six-lane divided and fully access-controlled interstate facility. The study area includes all land within 100 feet of the existing highway right-of-way along the corridor and within 300 feet of the existing highway right-of-way at interchanges along I-70. An expanded study area consisting of 1,000 feet on either side of the highway including the downtown loop is being evaluated for land use and socioeconomic studies. In the five year period 2003 to 2007, 20 crashes within the study area involved a fatality. Crash rates between 2003 to 2007 exceeded 150 percent of the statewide average at the downtown loop, westbound from the Benton curve to the downtown loop, eastbound from the Jackson curve to I-435, and at the I-435 interchange. A No Build strategy and three build strategies are evaluated in this first tier condensed final EIS. For the second tier studies, the portion of I-70 under analysis here will be divided into sections of independent utility. The No Build Strategy would include maintenance activities and projects already committed as part of the statewide transportation improvement program. The Improve Key Bottlenecks strategy would include: 1) rebuilding and/or rehabilitating I-70 and the entire downtown loop with a design life of 30 to 50 years; 2) downtown loop lane balance improvements; 3) improved interchanges by addressing ramp lengths, merge areas, weave sections, and bicycle/pedestrian access; 4) interchange additions, consolidations, modifications, or eliminations to improve traffic flow and safety; 5) improvement of the Jackson and Benton curves; 6) rebuilding the I-70/I-435 interchange to provide six lanes on I-70 and six lanes on I-435 through the interchange; 7) the addition of collector distributor roads on I-70 and I-470 through the I-70/I-470 interchange; 8) integrate Operation Green Light on parallel routes; 9) improve incident management response times; and 10) enhanced I-70 express bus service, bus transit on shoulder, and park and ride lots. The Add General Lanes strategy would include the actions of the Improve Key Bottlenecks strategy and would: rehabilitate and/or rebuild I-70 with four lanes in each direction from the downtown loop to I-470; upgrade the Truman Road interchange; rebuild the I-70/I-435 interchange to provide eight lanes on I-70 and six lanes on I-435 through the interchange; and add directional ramps in the southeast and southwest corners of the downtown loop. The Transportation Improvement Corridor Strategy would include all of the parts of the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy plus a dedicated transportation corridor between the downtown loop and I-470. The transportation improvement corridor could be located between the eastbound and westbound lanes or on one side of the I-70 corridor. As currently proposed, the transportation improvement corridor would be barrier-separated from the regular traffic lanes. The transportation improvement corridor could be used for congestion-managed lanes, reversible lanes, high occupancy vehicle lanes, or bus lanes. The preferred strategy is the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy from the downtown loop to east of I-435. The preferred strategy from east of I-435 to I-470 is either the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy or the Add General Lanes Strategy. That decision will be left open to the second tier studies. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement strategy would reduce crash rates, remove key bottlenecks, reduce the potential for ramp back-up onto the freeway, improve multi-modal travel times, restore and maintain bridge and pavement conditions, increase safe access across I-70 and the downtown loop for non-motorized travel, and improve the efficiency of freight movement. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred strategy would require the relocation of 228 single-family homes, 19 multi-family buildings, 67 businesses, and four community facilities, based upon the widest strategy footprint carried forward. Three downtown parks could be affected. Impervious surface, rainwater runoff, and noise levels are expected to increase. The build strategies could have adverse effects, including increased noise, on minorities and low-income persons living along the corridor. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0147D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110005, 205 pages and maps, January 6, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-10-01-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127061?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-06&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=FUTURE+I-70+KANSAS+CITY+METRO+PROJECT%2C+KANSAS+CITY%2C+JACKSON+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI+%28FIRST+TIER+CONDENSED+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=FUTURE+I-70+KANSAS+CITY+METRO+PROJECT%2C+KANSAS+CITY%2C+JACKSON+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI+%28FIRST+TIER+CONDENSED+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 6, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - FUTURE I-70 KANSAS CITY METRO PROJECT, KANSAS CITY, JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI (FIRST TIER CONDENSED FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 4 of 15] T2 - FUTURE I-70 KANSAS CITY METRO PROJECT, KANSAS CITY, JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI (FIRST TIER CONDENSED FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 873127060; 14761-5_0004 AB - PURPOSE: Improvement of the Interstate 70 (I-70) corridor from the Kansas state line to east of I-470, including the Kansas City downtown loop, in Jackson County, Missouri is proposed. The 18-mile I-70 corridor and the entire downtown loop are vital to serving regional transportation needs and I-70 in the Kansas City metropolitan area (KC Metro) is also the main artery for traffic bound for major cities and towns in Missouri and the adjacent states of Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, and Illinois. I-70 is a four-lane or six-lane divided and fully access-controlled interstate facility. The study area includes all land within 100 feet of the existing highway right-of-way along the corridor and within 300 feet of the existing highway right-of-way at interchanges along I-70. An expanded study area consisting of 1,000 feet on either side of the highway including the downtown loop is being evaluated for land use and socioeconomic studies. In the five year period 2003 to 2007, 20 crashes within the study area involved a fatality. Crash rates between 2003 to 2007 exceeded 150 percent of the statewide average at the downtown loop, westbound from the Benton curve to the downtown loop, eastbound from the Jackson curve to I-435, and at the I-435 interchange. A No Build strategy and three build strategies are evaluated in this first tier condensed final EIS. For the second tier studies, the portion of I-70 under analysis here will be divided into sections of independent utility. The No Build Strategy would include maintenance activities and projects already committed as part of the statewide transportation improvement program. The Improve Key Bottlenecks strategy would include: 1) rebuilding and/or rehabilitating I-70 and the entire downtown loop with a design life of 30 to 50 years; 2) downtown loop lane balance improvements; 3) improved interchanges by addressing ramp lengths, merge areas, weave sections, and bicycle/pedestrian access; 4) interchange additions, consolidations, modifications, or eliminations to improve traffic flow and safety; 5) improvement of the Jackson and Benton curves; 6) rebuilding the I-70/I-435 interchange to provide six lanes on I-70 and six lanes on I-435 through the interchange; 7) the addition of collector distributor roads on I-70 and I-470 through the I-70/I-470 interchange; 8) integrate Operation Green Light on parallel routes; 9) improve incident management response times; and 10) enhanced I-70 express bus service, bus transit on shoulder, and park and ride lots. The Add General Lanes strategy would include the actions of the Improve Key Bottlenecks strategy and would: rehabilitate and/or rebuild I-70 with four lanes in each direction from the downtown loop to I-470; upgrade the Truman Road interchange; rebuild the I-70/I-435 interchange to provide eight lanes on I-70 and six lanes on I-435 through the interchange; and add directional ramps in the southeast and southwest corners of the downtown loop. The Transportation Improvement Corridor Strategy would include all of the parts of the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy plus a dedicated transportation corridor between the downtown loop and I-470. The transportation improvement corridor could be located between the eastbound and westbound lanes or on one side of the I-70 corridor. As currently proposed, the transportation improvement corridor would be barrier-separated from the regular traffic lanes. The transportation improvement corridor could be used for congestion-managed lanes, reversible lanes, high occupancy vehicle lanes, or bus lanes. The preferred strategy is the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy from the downtown loop to east of I-435. The preferred strategy from east of I-435 to I-470 is either the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy or the Add General Lanes Strategy. That decision will be left open to the second tier studies. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement strategy would reduce crash rates, remove key bottlenecks, reduce the potential for ramp back-up onto the freeway, improve multi-modal travel times, restore and maintain bridge and pavement conditions, increase safe access across I-70 and the downtown loop for non-motorized travel, and improve the efficiency of freight movement. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred strategy would require the relocation of 228 single-family homes, 19 multi-family buildings, 67 businesses, and four community facilities, based upon the widest strategy footprint carried forward. Three downtown parks could be affected. Impervious surface, rainwater runoff, and noise levels are expected to increase. The build strategies could have adverse effects, including increased noise, on minorities and low-income persons living along the corridor. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0147D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110005, 205 pages and maps, January 6, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-10-01-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127060?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-06&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=FUTURE+I-70+KANSAS+CITY+METRO+PROJECT%2C+KANSAS+CITY%2C+JACKSON+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI+%28FIRST+TIER+CONDENSED+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=FUTURE+I-70+KANSAS+CITY+METRO+PROJECT%2C+KANSAS+CITY%2C+JACKSON+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI+%28FIRST+TIER+CONDENSED+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 6, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - FUTURE I-70 KANSAS CITY METRO PROJECT, KANSAS CITY, JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI (FIRST TIER CONDENSED FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 3 of 15] T2 - FUTURE I-70 KANSAS CITY METRO PROJECT, KANSAS CITY, JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI (FIRST TIER CONDENSED FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 873127052; 14761-5_0003 AB - PURPOSE: Improvement of the Interstate 70 (I-70) corridor from the Kansas state line to east of I-470, including the Kansas City downtown loop, in Jackson County, Missouri is proposed. The 18-mile I-70 corridor and the entire downtown loop are vital to serving regional transportation needs and I-70 in the Kansas City metropolitan area (KC Metro) is also the main artery for traffic bound for major cities and towns in Missouri and the adjacent states of Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, and Illinois. I-70 is a four-lane or six-lane divided and fully access-controlled interstate facility. The study area includes all land within 100 feet of the existing highway right-of-way along the corridor and within 300 feet of the existing highway right-of-way at interchanges along I-70. An expanded study area consisting of 1,000 feet on either side of the highway including the downtown loop is being evaluated for land use and socioeconomic studies. In the five year period 2003 to 2007, 20 crashes within the study area involved a fatality. Crash rates between 2003 to 2007 exceeded 150 percent of the statewide average at the downtown loop, westbound from the Benton curve to the downtown loop, eastbound from the Jackson curve to I-435, and at the I-435 interchange. A No Build strategy and three build strategies are evaluated in this first tier condensed final EIS. For the second tier studies, the portion of I-70 under analysis here will be divided into sections of independent utility. The No Build Strategy would include maintenance activities and projects already committed as part of the statewide transportation improvement program. The Improve Key Bottlenecks strategy would include: 1) rebuilding and/or rehabilitating I-70 and the entire downtown loop with a design life of 30 to 50 years; 2) downtown loop lane balance improvements; 3) improved interchanges by addressing ramp lengths, merge areas, weave sections, and bicycle/pedestrian access; 4) interchange additions, consolidations, modifications, or eliminations to improve traffic flow and safety; 5) improvement of the Jackson and Benton curves; 6) rebuilding the I-70/I-435 interchange to provide six lanes on I-70 and six lanes on I-435 through the interchange; 7) the addition of collector distributor roads on I-70 and I-470 through the I-70/I-470 interchange; 8) integrate Operation Green Light on parallel routes; 9) improve incident management response times; and 10) enhanced I-70 express bus service, bus transit on shoulder, and park and ride lots. The Add General Lanes strategy would include the actions of the Improve Key Bottlenecks strategy and would: rehabilitate and/or rebuild I-70 with four lanes in each direction from the downtown loop to I-470; upgrade the Truman Road interchange; rebuild the I-70/I-435 interchange to provide eight lanes on I-70 and six lanes on I-435 through the interchange; and add directional ramps in the southeast and southwest corners of the downtown loop. The Transportation Improvement Corridor Strategy would include all of the parts of the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy plus a dedicated transportation corridor between the downtown loop and I-470. The transportation improvement corridor could be located between the eastbound and westbound lanes or on one side of the I-70 corridor. As currently proposed, the transportation improvement corridor would be barrier-separated from the regular traffic lanes. The transportation improvement corridor could be used for congestion-managed lanes, reversible lanes, high occupancy vehicle lanes, or bus lanes. The preferred strategy is the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy from the downtown loop to east of I-435. The preferred strategy from east of I-435 to I-470 is either the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy or the Add General Lanes Strategy. That decision will be left open to the second tier studies. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement strategy would reduce crash rates, remove key bottlenecks, reduce the potential for ramp back-up onto the freeway, improve multi-modal travel times, restore and maintain bridge and pavement conditions, increase safe access across I-70 and the downtown loop for non-motorized travel, and improve the efficiency of freight movement. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred strategy would require the relocation of 228 single-family homes, 19 multi-family buildings, 67 businesses, and four community facilities, based upon the widest strategy footprint carried forward. Three downtown parks could be affected. Impervious surface, rainwater runoff, and noise levels are expected to increase. The build strategies could have adverse effects, including increased noise, on minorities and low-income persons living along the corridor. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0147D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110005, 205 pages and maps, January 6, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-10-01-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127052?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-06&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=FUTURE+I-70+KANSAS+CITY+METRO+PROJECT%2C+KANSAS+CITY%2C+JACKSON+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI+%28FIRST+TIER+CONDENSED+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=FUTURE+I-70+KANSAS+CITY+METRO+PROJECT%2C+KANSAS+CITY%2C+JACKSON+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI+%28FIRST+TIER+CONDENSED+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 6, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - FUTURE I-70 KANSAS CITY METRO PROJECT, KANSAS CITY, JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI (FIRST TIER CONDENSED FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 16370620; 14761 AB - PURPOSE: Improvement of the Interstate 70 (I-70) corridor from the Kansas state line to east of I-470, including the Kansas City downtown loop, in Jackson County, Missouri is proposed. The 18-mile I-70 corridor and the entire downtown loop are vital to serving regional transportation needs and I-70 in the Kansas City metropolitan area (KC Metro) is also the main artery for traffic bound for major cities and towns in Missouri and the adjacent states of Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, and Illinois. I-70 is a four-lane or six-lane divided and fully access-controlled interstate facility. The study area includes all land within 100 feet of the existing highway right-of-way along the corridor and within 300 feet of the existing highway right-of-way at interchanges along I-70. An expanded study area consisting of 1,000 feet on either side of the highway including the downtown loop is being evaluated for land use and socioeconomic studies. In the five year period 2003 to 2007, 20 crashes within the study area involved a fatality. Crash rates between 2003 to 2007 exceeded 150 percent of the statewide average at the downtown loop, westbound from the Benton curve to the downtown loop, eastbound from the Jackson curve to I-435, and at the I-435 interchange. A No Build strategy and three build strategies are evaluated in this first tier condensed final EIS. For the second tier studies, the portion of I-70 under analysis here will be divided into sections of independent utility. The No Build Strategy would include maintenance activities and projects already committed as part of the statewide transportation improvement program. The Improve Key Bottlenecks strategy would include: 1) rebuilding and/or rehabilitating I-70 and the entire downtown loop with a design life of 30 to 50 years; 2) downtown loop lane balance improvements; 3) improved interchanges by addressing ramp lengths, merge areas, weave sections, and bicycle/pedestrian access; 4) interchange additions, consolidations, modifications, or eliminations to improve traffic flow and safety; 5) improvement of the Jackson and Benton curves; 6) rebuilding the I-70/I-435 interchange to provide six lanes on I-70 and six lanes on I-435 through the interchange; 7) the addition of collector distributor roads on I-70 and I-470 through the I-70/I-470 interchange; 8) integrate Operation Green Light on parallel routes; 9) improve incident management response times; and 10) enhanced I-70 express bus service, bus transit on shoulder, and park and ride lots. The Add General Lanes strategy would include the actions of the Improve Key Bottlenecks strategy and would: rehabilitate and/or rebuild I-70 with four lanes in each direction from the downtown loop to I-470; upgrade the Truman Road interchange; rebuild the I-70/I-435 interchange to provide eight lanes on I-70 and six lanes on I-435 through the interchange; and add directional ramps in the southeast and southwest corners of the downtown loop. The Transportation Improvement Corridor Strategy would include all of the parts of the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy plus a dedicated transportation corridor between the downtown loop and I-470. The transportation improvement corridor could be located between the eastbound and westbound lanes or on one side of the I-70 corridor. As currently proposed, the transportation improvement corridor would be barrier-separated from the regular traffic lanes. The transportation improvement corridor could be used for congestion-managed lanes, reversible lanes, high occupancy vehicle lanes, or bus lanes. The preferred strategy is the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy from the downtown loop to east of I-435. The preferred strategy from east of I-435 to I-470 is either the Improve Key Bottlenecks Strategy or the Add General Lanes Strategy. That decision will be left open to the second tier studies. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement strategy would reduce crash rates, remove key bottlenecks, reduce the potential for ramp back-up onto the freeway, improve multi-modal travel times, restore and maintain bridge and pavement conditions, increase safe access across I-70 and the downtown loop for non-motorized travel, and improve the efficiency of freight movement. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred strategy would require the relocation of 228 single-family homes, 19 multi-family buildings, 67 businesses, and four community facilities, based upon the widest strategy footprint carried forward. Three downtown parks could be affected. Impervious surface, rainwater runoff, and noise levels are expected to increase. The build strategies could have adverse effects, including increased noise, on minorities and low-income persons living along the corridor. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0147D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110005, 205 pages and maps, January 6, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-10-01-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/16370620?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-06&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=FUTURE+I-70+KANSAS+CITY+METRO+PROJECT%2C+KANSAS+CITY%2C+JACKSON+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI+%28FIRST+TIER+CONDENSED+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=FUTURE+I-70+KANSAS+CITY+METRO+PROJECT%2C+KANSAS+CITY%2C+JACKSON+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI+%28FIRST+TIER+CONDENSED+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 6, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BIRD HAZARD REDUCTION PROGRAM, JOHN F. KENNEDY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, QUEENS COUNTY, NEW YORK (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF 1994). [Part 1 of 1] T2 - BIRD HAZARD REDUCTION PROGRAM, JOHN F. KENNEDY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, QUEENS COUNTY, NEW YORK (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF 1994). AN - 873127673; 14757-1_0001 AB - PURPOSE: An expansion of the bird hazard reduction program around the John F. Kennedy International Airport (JFK) in Queens County, New York is proposed. The airport location is adjacent to the 9,155-acre Jamaica Bay National Wildlife Refuge and bird strikes create substantial hazards to human health and safety, as well as major financial losses. An incident in 1975, when herring gulls were ingested into an engine of a departing DC-10, caused an aborted takeoff. Fortunately, there were no fatalities; but the aircraft caught fire and was destroyed. In 1995, an Air France Concorde ingested a pair of Canada geese into an engine, and while the incident resulted in a safe landing, the aircraft sustained major damage. Increasing gull strike problems and public concern resulted in the development of a 1994 EIS on bird strike management at JFK; and bird strikes have decreased substantially since the implementation of the integrated bird hazard management program and on-airport shooting program. However, bird strikes continue and there have been 1,759 bird strikes involving 72 bird species at JFK over the period 1994 to 2009. This draft supplemental EIS updates and expands the 1994 final EIS and reviews six alternatives for reducing bird strikes. Under the No Action Alternative (Alternative 1), current bird hazard management would continue with use of gull hazard management methods, on-airport use of nonlethal and lethal methods to reduce hazards to aircraft by all bird species, and technical advice and outreach to off-airport landowners and property managers regarding ways to reduce bird attractants. Under Alternative 2, existing on-airport management efforts would be augmented by establishing a regular bird hazard monitoring program and improved reporting of nonlethal management actions. Also, agencies would be enabled to permit, recommend, and use nonlethal bird hazard management methods at off-airport sites to reduce bird hazards with the permission of the landowner/manager. This alternative also includes the use of nonlethal methods to reduce hazards to aircraft from birds at Gateway National Recreation Area (NRA), particularly at Rulers Bar Hassock, and Pennsylvania and Fountain Avenue Landfills. Alternative 3 would increase the duration of the annual supplemental on-airport shooting program from May through August to May through November. Personnel at the gull shooting stations would be authorized to use lethal methods to keep Canada geese, Atlantic brant, mute swans, double-crested cormorants, and ducks from entering JFK airspace in the same manner as gull species are taken. Supplemental on-airport shooting program personnel would also be authorized to take individuals from flocks of rock pigeons, European starlings, crows and blackbirds and to frighten remaining flock members from the site. This alternative could also include use of lethal rabbit and rodent control measures to reduce attractants for raptors. Alternative 4 would enable lethal bird hazard management projects at off-airport sites targeting Canada geese, mute swans, double-crested cormorants, blackbirds, crows, rock pigeons, and European starlings within a five-mile radius of JFK. This alternative would also include efforts to reduce the resident Canada Goose population within seven miles of the airport, including the use of lethal methods at Rulers Bar Hassock and Pennsylvania Avenue and Fountain Avenue Landfills in Gateway NRA. Egg oiling/addling/puncturing could also be used on mute swan nests in Gateway NRA. Alternative 5 would involve relocation of the Jamaica Bay laughing gull colony. Finally, Alternative 6 would combine the current program and the supplements of alternatives 2 through 5, thus enabling the use of the full range of bird hazard reduction techniques. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would minimize the risk of aircraft accidents resulting from birdstrikes. On-airport implementation of improved monitoring and data collection procedures should result in more targeted bird hazard management efforts and a more effective and efficient bird hazard management program. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Relocation of target birds could disrupt or displace nontarget bird species. Some nonlethal management methods such as prolonged harassment could have an adverse impact on vegetation and nontarget species, but impacts are expected to be minimal and short-term. Off-airport habitat management activities to reduce target bird use of sites may have adverse impacts on species with similar habitat requirements but may be beneficial to other species. LEGAL MANDATES: Animal Damage Control Act of 1931 (7 U.S.C. 426 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the draft and final EISs, see 94-0044D, Volume 18, Number 1 and 94-0110F, Volume 18, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110001, 403 pages on CD-ROM, January 5, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Landfills KW - Pest Control KW - Preserves KW - Vegetation KW - Safety KW - Wildlife Management KW - Gateway National Recreation Area KW - Jamaica Bay National Wildlife Refuge KW - John F. Kennedy International Airport KW - New York KW - Animal Damage Control Act of 1931, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127673?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-05&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BIRD+HAZARD+REDUCTION+PROGRAM%2C+JOHN+F.+KENNEDY+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT%2C+QUEENS+COUNTY%2C+NEW+YORK+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+1994%29.&rft.title=BIRD+HAZARD+REDUCTION+PROGRAM%2C+JOHN+F.+KENNEDY+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT%2C+QUEENS+COUNTY%2C+NEW+YORK+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+1994%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Castleton, New York; DA N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 5, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TOOELE COUNTY MIDVALLEY HIGHWAY PROJECT, UTAH. [Part 5 of 5] T2 - TOOELE COUNTY MIDVALLEY HIGHWAY PROJECT, UTAH. AN - 873127342; 14759-3_0005 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new highway between State Route 36 (SR-36) and Interstate 80 (I-80) in Tooele County, Utah is proposed. The project study area is located in the Tooele Valley with Sheep Lane roadway to the west and SR-36 to the east. Development trends and plans within Tooele Valley include large-scale residential and commercial expansion within the next five to ten years in Tooele City, Erda Township, Stansbury Park, Lake Point, and Eastern Grantsville. The population in the valley is projected to triple by the design year 2030. Since the mid-1990's, five major studies or plans have identified the need for increased capacity due to increased travel demand. Traffic analyses indicate that by 2030, SR-36, the main north-south route in the project study area will become heavily congested and fail if no improvements are made. The existing I-80 Lake Point interchange will also fail. Three alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are presented in this abbreviated final EIS. The Midvalley Highway West Alternative with Option B is the preferred alternative and would include the following elements: a four lane arterial between SR-36 and SR-112; a four lane freeway between SR-112 and I-80; a re-alignment of SR-138 at Sheep Lane; interchanges with the proposed freeway at I-80, SR-138, and 1000 North, as well as the planned 3400 North (future parkway); structures over the Union Pacific Railroad tracks, Erda Way, Sheep Lane, and the Midvalley Trail; and at-grade intersections with SR-112 and SR-36. Due to funding constraints, the Midvalley Highway may be constructed in phases. One scenario would be to build the full project as two arterials, later expanding to a freeway when necessary. Another phasing strategy would be to build the project by segments. The northern segment between SR-138 and I-80 may be constructed first, followed by the southern arterial segment between SR-36 and SR-112, with the segment between SR-112 and SR-138 constructed last. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would provide increased north-south transportation capacity and thereby reduce anticipated congestion on SR-36 and at the Lake Point interchange with I-80. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require right-of-way acquisition of 577 acres including194 acres of agricultural lands and 6.7 acres of wetlands. One residential relocation could be required. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0432D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110003, Abbreviated Final EIS--132 pages and maps, Conceptual Engineering Drawings--CD-ROM, January 5, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-09-01-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Utah KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127342?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-05&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TOOELE+COUNTY+MIDVALLEY+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=TOOELE+COUNTY+MIDVALLEY+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salt Lake City, Utah; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 5, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TOOELE COUNTY MIDVALLEY HIGHWAY PROJECT, UTAH. [Part 4 of 5] T2 - TOOELE COUNTY MIDVALLEY HIGHWAY PROJECT, UTAH. AN - 873127335; 14759-3_0004 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new highway between State Route 36 (SR-36) and Interstate 80 (I-80) in Tooele County, Utah is proposed. The project study area is located in the Tooele Valley with Sheep Lane roadway to the west and SR-36 to the east. Development trends and plans within Tooele Valley include large-scale residential and commercial expansion within the next five to ten years in Tooele City, Erda Township, Stansbury Park, Lake Point, and Eastern Grantsville. The population in the valley is projected to triple by the design year 2030. Since the mid-1990's, five major studies or plans have identified the need for increased capacity due to increased travel demand. Traffic analyses indicate that by 2030, SR-36, the main north-south route in the project study area will become heavily congested and fail if no improvements are made. The existing I-80 Lake Point interchange will also fail. Three alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are presented in this abbreviated final EIS. The Midvalley Highway West Alternative with Option B is the preferred alternative and would include the following elements: a four lane arterial between SR-36 and SR-112; a four lane freeway between SR-112 and I-80; a re-alignment of SR-138 at Sheep Lane; interchanges with the proposed freeway at I-80, SR-138, and 1000 North, as well as the planned 3400 North (future parkway); structures over the Union Pacific Railroad tracks, Erda Way, Sheep Lane, and the Midvalley Trail; and at-grade intersections with SR-112 and SR-36. Due to funding constraints, the Midvalley Highway may be constructed in phases. One scenario would be to build the full project as two arterials, later expanding to a freeway when necessary. Another phasing strategy would be to build the project by segments. The northern segment between SR-138 and I-80 may be constructed first, followed by the southern arterial segment between SR-36 and SR-112, with the segment between SR-112 and SR-138 constructed last. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would provide increased north-south transportation capacity and thereby reduce anticipated congestion on SR-36 and at the Lake Point interchange with I-80. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require right-of-way acquisition of 577 acres including194 acres of agricultural lands and 6.7 acres of wetlands. One residential relocation could be required. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0432D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110003, Abbreviated Final EIS--132 pages and maps, Conceptual Engineering Drawings--CD-ROM, January 5, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-09-01-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Utah KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127335?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-05&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TOOELE+COUNTY+MIDVALLEY+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=TOOELE+COUNTY+MIDVALLEY+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salt Lake City, Utah; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 5, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TOOELE COUNTY MIDVALLEY HIGHWAY PROJECT, UTAH. [Part 3 of 5] T2 - TOOELE COUNTY MIDVALLEY HIGHWAY PROJECT, UTAH. AN - 873127330; 14759-3_0003 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new highway between State Route 36 (SR-36) and Interstate 80 (I-80) in Tooele County, Utah is proposed. The project study area is located in the Tooele Valley with Sheep Lane roadway to the west and SR-36 to the east. Development trends and plans within Tooele Valley include large-scale residential and commercial expansion within the next five to ten years in Tooele City, Erda Township, Stansbury Park, Lake Point, and Eastern Grantsville. The population in the valley is projected to triple by the design year 2030. Since the mid-1990's, five major studies or plans have identified the need for increased capacity due to increased travel demand. Traffic analyses indicate that by 2030, SR-36, the main north-south route in the project study area will become heavily congested and fail if no improvements are made. The existing I-80 Lake Point interchange will also fail. Three alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are presented in this abbreviated final EIS. The Midvalley Highway West Alternative with Option B is the preferred alternative and would include the following elements: a four lane arterial between SR-36 and SR-112; a four lane freeway between SR-112 and I-80; a re-alignment of SR-138 at Sheep Lane; interchanges with the proposed freeway at I-80, SR-138, and 1000 North, as well as the planned 3400 North (future parkway); structures over the Union Pacific Railroad tracks, Erda Way, Sheep Lane, and the Midvalley Trail; and at-grade intersections with SR-112 and SR-36. Due to funding constraints, the Midvalley Highway may be constructed in phases. One scenario would be to build the full project as two arterials, later expanding to a freeway when necessary. Another phasing strategy would be to build the project by segments. The northern segment between SR-138 and I-80 may be constructed first, followed by the southern arterial segment between SR-36 and SR-112, with the segment between SR-112 and SR-138 constructed last. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would provide increased north-south transportation capacity and thereby reduce anticipated congestion on SR-36 and at the Lake Point interchange with I-80. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require right-of-way acquisition of 577 acres including194 acres of agricultural lands and 6.7 acres of wetlands. One residential relocation could be required. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0432D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110003, Abbreviated Final EIS--132 pages and maps, Conceptual Engineering Drawings--CD-ROM, January 5, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-09-01-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Utah KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127330?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-05&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TOOELE+COUNTY+MIDVALLEY+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=TOOELE+COUNTY+MIDVALLEY+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salt Lake City, Utah; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 5, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TOOELE COUNTY MIDVALLEY HIGHWAY PROJECT, UTAH. [Part 2 of 5] T2 - TOOELE COUNTY MIDVALLEY HIGHWAY PROJECT, UTAH. AN - 873127326; 14759-3_0002 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new highway between State Route 36 (SR-36) and Interstate 80 (I-80) in Tooele County, Utah is proposed. The project study area is located in the Tooele Valley with Sheep Lane roadway to the west and SR-36 to the east. Development trends and plans within Tooele Valley include large-scale residential and commercial expansion within the next five to ten years in Tooele City, Erda Township, Stansbury Park, Lake Point, and Eastern Grantsville. The population in the valley is projected to triple by the design year 2030. Since the mid-1990's, five major studies or plans have identified the need for increased capacity due to increased travel demand. Traffic analyses indicate that by 2030, SR-36, the main north-south route in the project study area will become heavily congested and fail if no improvements are made. The existing I-80 Lake Point interchange will also fail. Three alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are presented in this abbreviated final EIS. The Midvalley Highway West Alternative with Option B is the preferred alternative and would include the following elements: a four lane arterial between SR-36 and SR-112; a four lane freeway between SR-112 and I-80; a re-alignment of SR-138 at Sheep Lane; interchanges with the proposed freeway at I-80, SR-138, and 1000 North, as well as the planned 3400 North (future parkway); structures over the Union Pacific Railroad tracks, Erda Way, Sheep Lane, and the Midvalley Trail; and at-grade intersections with SR-112 and SR-36. Due to funding constraints, the Midvalley Highway may be constructed in phases. One scenario would be to build the full project as two arterials, later expanding to a freeway when necessary. Another phasing strategy would be to build the project by segments. The northern segment between SR-138 and I-80 may be constructed first, followed by the southern arterial segment between SR-36 and SR-112, with the segment between SR-112 and SR-138 constructed last. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would provide increased north-south transportation capacity and thereby reduce anticipated congestion on SR-36 and at the Lake Point interchange with I-80. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require right-of-way acquisition of 577 acres including194 acres of agricultural lands and 6.7 acres of wetlands. One residential relocation could be required. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0432D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110003, Abbreviated Final EIS--132 pages and maps, Conceptual Engineering Drawings--CD-ROM, January 5, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-09-01-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Utah KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127326?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-05&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TOOELE+COUNTY+MIDVALLEY+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=TOOELE+COUNTY+MIDVALLEY+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salt Lake City, Utah; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 5, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TOOELE COUNTY MIDVALLEY HIGHWAY PROJECT, UTAH. [Part 1 of 5] T2 - TOOELE COUNTY MIDVALLEY HIGHWAY PROJECT, UTAH. AN - 873127321; 14759-3_0001 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new highway between State Route 36 (SR-36) and Interstate 80 (I-80) in Tooele County, Utah is proposed. The project study area is located in the Tooele Valley with Sheep Lane roadway to the west and SR-36 to the east. Development trends and plans within Tooele Valley include large-scale residential and commercial expansion within the next five to ten years in Tooele City, Erda Township, Stansbury Park, Lake Point, and Eastern Grantsville. The population in the valley is projected to triple by the design year 2030. Since the mid-1990's, five major studies or plans have identified the need for increased capacity due to increased travel demand. Traffic analyses indicate that by 2030, SR-36, the main north-south route in the project study area will become heavily congested and fail if no improvements are made. The existing I-80 Lake Point interchange will also fail. Three alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are presented in this abbreviated final EIS. The Midvalley Highway West Alternative with Option B is the preferred alternative and would include the following elements: a four lane arterial between SR-36 and SR-112; a four lane freeway between SR-112 and I-80; a re-alignment of SR-138 at Sheep Lane; interchanges with the proposed freeway at I-80, SR-138, and 1000 North, as well as the planned 3400 North (future parkway); structures over the Union Pacific Railroad tracks, Erda Way, Sheep Lane, and the Midvalley Trail; and at-grade intersections with SR-112 and SR-36. Due to funding constraints, the Midvalley Highway may be constructed in phases. One scenario would be to build the full project as two arterials, later expanding to a freeway when necessary. Another phasing strategy would be to build the project by segments. The northern segment between SR-138 and I-80 may be constructed first, followed by the southern arterial segment between SR-36 and SR-112, with the segment between SR-112 and SR-138 constructed last. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would provide increased north-south transportation capacity and thereby reduce anticipated congestion on SR-36 and at the Lake Point interchange with I-80. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require right-of-way acquisition of 577 acres including194 acres of agricultural lands and 6.7 acres of wetlands. One residential relocation could be required. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0432D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110003, Abbreviated Final EIS--132 pages and maps, Conceptual Engineering Drawings--CD-ROM, January 5, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-09-01-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Utah KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127321?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-05&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TOOELE+COUNTY+MIDVALLEY+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=TOOELE+COUNTY+MIDVALLEY+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salt Lake City, Utah; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 5, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIDRA CORRIDOR FROM CIDRA INDUSTRIAL STREET TO PR-52, PUERTO RICO. AN - 853675523; 14758 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a new four-mile highway to improve mobility between the municipality of Cidra and the Puerto Rico Strategic Highway Network (PRSHN) is proposed. The project area is in the municipalities of Cidra and Cayey, both of which are located in the mountain ranges of the central eastern region of Puerto Rico, approximately 22 and 25 miles to the south south-west of San Juan, respectively. Both municipalities encompass sensitive natural resource areas and habitat for the endangered Puerto Rican plain pigeon. Cidra has experienced considerable population growth within its urban and suburban township boundaries. Private cars are the principal mode of transportation and the main access to Cidra from the PRSHN is along secondary road PR-172, which connects the PR-52 expressway to Cidra central business district. From PR-52 to La Sierra Sector, PR-172 is a four-lane road characterized by steep slopes, small radius horizontal curves, poor drainage, and absence of pavement markings. From La Sierra Sector to Cidra central business district, PR-172 is a four-lane road with small radius horizontal curves, poor drainage, and absence of pavement markings. The poor roadway geometry contributes to unsafe conditions which are exacerbated when heavy freight traffic utilizes the road. PR-172 is classified as one of the most dangerous roads in Puerto Rico, averaging over three fatalities per year since 2000. In addition to a No Action Alternative, five alignments for new route construction are evaluated in this draft EIS. Current land uses along the new road alternative corridors is predominately rural residential, secondary forest, and pasture zones. Under the build alternatives, a new four-lane road would be constructed beginning at the intersection of PR-7733 and the entrance to the Cidra Industrial Park and ending at three different locations along PR-52. New intersections would be constructed at existing roads. For alternatives C1, C2, and C3, the intersection of PR-1 with PR-184 in Cayey and the intersection of PR-7733 and the industrial entrance in Cidra would be converted to four leg intersections. Alternative C4 would require three new intersections with the new connector at PR-7733, PR-1, and PR-52. Alternative C5 would require an additional intersection at PR-743. Alternative C3, which is the preferred alternative, would require construction of five overpasses or underpasses across existing roads, but would not require bridges over water bodies. Estimated capital costs of the build alternatives range from $117.7 million for Alternative C3 to $141.4 million for Alternative C5. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new road would improve transportation safety, eliminate congestion, and provide greater levels of service. Improved mobility would enhance economic development. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction impacts would include traffic detours, temporary deterioration of air quality, increased noise and vibration, increased sedimentation and turbidity in water bodies, and temporary diversion of streams and rivers during placement of culverts and bridge piers. Project right-of-way requirements would involve 17 to 31 stream crossings and would impact 87.4 to 126.3 acres of forest, 5.8 to 13.0 acres of wetlands, and 264 to 349 acres of Puerto Rican plain pigeon habitat. Identified pre-Columbian and colonial archaeological resources could be affected. Acquisition of 54 to 69 residential structures and up to seven commercial structures would be required. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 110002, Draft EIS--191 pages, Appendices--6 volumes, January 5, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-PR-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Central Business Districts KW - Creeks KW - Forests KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Puerto Rico KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/853675523?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-05&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIDRA+CORRIDOR+FROM+CIDRA+INDUSTRIAL+STREET+TO+PR-52%2C+PUERTO+RICO.&rft.title=CIDRA+CORRIDOR+FROM+CIDRA+INDUSTRIAL+STREET+TO+PR-52%2C+PUERTO+RICO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Richmond, Virginia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 5, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BIRD HAZARD REDUCTION PROGRAM, JOHN F. KENNEDY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, QUEENS COUNTY, NEW YORK (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF 1994). AN - 16385397; 14757 AB - PURPOSE: An expansion of the bird hazard reduction program around the John F. Kennedy International Airport (JFK) in Queens County, New York is proposed. The airport location is adjacent to the 9,155-acre Jamaica Bay National Wildlife Refuge and bird strikes create substantial hazards to human health and safety, as well as major financial losses. An incident in 1975, when herring gulls were ingested into an engine of a departing DC-10, caused an aborted takeoff. Fortunately, there were no fatalities; but the aircraft caught fire and was destroyed. In 1995, an Air France Concorde ingested a pair of Canada geese into an engine, and while the incident resulted in a safe landing, the aircraft sustained major damage. Increasing gull strike problems and public concern resulted in the development of a 1994 EIS on bird strike management at JFK; and bird strikes have decreased substantially since the implementation of the integrated bird hazard management program and on-airport shooting program. However, bird strikes continue and there have been 1,759 bird strikes involving 72 bird species at JFK over the period 1994 to 2009. This draft supplemental EIS updates and expands the 1994 final EIS and reviews six alternatives for reducing bird strikes. Under the No Action Alternative (Alternative 1), current bird hazard management would continue with use of gull hazard management methods, on-airport use of nonlethal and lethal methods to reduce hazards to aircraft by all bird species, and technical advice and outreach to off-airport landowners and property managers regarding ways to reduce bird attractants. Under Alternative 2, existing on-airport management efforts would be augmented by establishing a regular bird hazard monitoring program and improved reporting of nonlethal management actions. Also, agencies would be enabled to permit, recommend, and use nonlethal bird hazard management methods at off-airport sites to reduce bird hazards with the permission of the landowner/manager. This alternative also includes the use of nonlethal methods to reduce hazards to aircraft from birds at Gateway National Recreation Area (NRA), particularly at Rulers Bar Hassock, and Pennsylvania and Fountain Avenue Landfills. Alternative 3 would increase the duration of the annual supplemental on-airport shooting program from May through August to May through November. Personnel at the gull shooting stations would be authorized to use lethal methods to keep Canada geese, Atlantic brant, mute swans, double-crested cormorants, and ducks from entering JFK airspace in the same manner as gull species are taken. Supplemental on-airport shooting program personnel would also be authorized to take individuals from flocks of rock pigeons, European starlings, crows and blackbirds and to frighten remaining flock members from the site. This alternative could also include use of lethal rabbit and rodent control measures to reduce attractants for raptors. Alternative 4 would enable lethal bird hazard management projects at off-airport sites targeting Canada geese, mute swans, double-crested cormorants, blackbirds, crows, rock pigeons, and European starlings within a five-mile radius of JFK. This alternative would also include efforts to reduce the resident Canada Goose population within seven miles of the airport, including the use of lethal methods at Rulers Bar Hassock and Pennsylvania Avenue and Fountain Avenue Landfills in Gateway NRA. Egg oiling/addling/puncturing could also be used on mute swan nests in Gateway NRA. Alternative 5 would involve relocation of the Jamaica Bay laughing gull colony. Finally, Alternative 6 would combine the current program and the supplements of alternatives 2 through 5, thus enabling the use of the full range of bird hazard reduction techniques. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would minimize the risk of aircraft accidents resulting from birdstrikes. On-airport implementation of improved monitoring and data collection procedures should result in more targeted bird hazard management efforts and a more effective and efficient bird hazard management program. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Relocation of target birds could disrupt or displace nontarget bird species. Some nonlethal management methods such as prolonged harassment could have an adverse impact on vegetation and nontarget species, but impacts are expected to be minimal and short-term. Off-airport habitat management activities to reduce target bird use of sites may have adverse impacts on species with similar habitat requirements but may be beneficial to other species. LEGAL MANDATES: Animal Damage Control Act of 1931 (7 U.S.C. 426 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the draft and final EISs, see 94-0044D, Volume 18, Number 1 and 94-0110F, Volume 18, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110001, 403 pages on CD-ROM, January 5, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Landfills KW - Pest Control KW - Preserves KW - Vegetation KW - Safety KW - Wildlife Management KW - Gateway National Recreation Area KW - Jamaica Bay National Wildlife Refuge KW - John F. Kennedy International Airport KW - New York KW - Animal Damage Control Act of 1931, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/16385397?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-05&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BIRD+HAZARD+REDUCTION+PROGRAM%2C+JOHN+F.+KENNEDY+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT%2C+QUEENS+COUNTY%2C+NEW+YORK+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+1994%29.&rft.title=BIRD+HAZARD+REDUCTION+PROGRAM%2C+JOHN+F.+KENNEDY+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT%2C+QUEENS+COUNTY%2C+NEW+YORK+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+1994%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Castleton, New York; DA N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 5, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TOOELE COUNTY MIDVALLEY HIGHWAY PROJECT, UTAH. AN - 16373305; 14759 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new highway between State Route 36 (SR-36) and Interstate 80 (I-80) in Tooele County, Utah is proposed. The project study area is located in the Tooele Valley with Sheep Lane roadway to the west and SR-36 to the east. Development trends and plans within Tooele Valley include large-scale residential and commercial expansion within the next five to ten years in Tooele City, Erda Township, Stansbury Park, Lake Point, and Eastern Grantsville. The population in the valley is projected to triple by the design year 2030. Since the mid-1990's, five major studies or plans have identified the need for increased capacity due to increased travel demand. Traffic analyses indicate that by 2030, SR-36, the main north-south route in the project study area will become heavily congested and fail if no improvements are made. The existing I-80 Lake Point interchange will also fail. Three alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are presented in this abbreviated final EIS. The Midvalley Highway West Alternative with Option B is the preferred alternative and would include the following elements: a four lane arterial between SR-36 and SR-112; a four lane freeway between SR-112 and I-80; a re-alignment of SR-138 at Sheep Lane; interchanges with the proposed freeway at I-80, SR-138, and 1000 North, as well as the planned 3400 North (future parkway); structures over the Union Pacific Railroad tracks, Erda Way, Sheep Lane, and the Midvalley Trail; and at-grade intersections with SR-112 and SR-36. Due to funding constraints, the Midvalley Highway may be constructed in phases. One scenario would be to build the full project as two arterials, later expanding to a freeway when necessary. Another phasing strategy would be to build the project by segments. The northern segment between SR-138 and I-80 may be constructed first, followed by the southern arterial segment between SR-36 and SR-112, with the segment between SR-112 and SR-138 constructed last. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would provide increased north-south transportation capacity and thereby reduce anticipated congestion on SR-36 and at the Lake Point interchange with I-80. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require right-of-way acquisition of 577 acres including194 acres of agricultural lands and 6.7 acres of wetlands. One residential relocation could be required. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0432D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110003, Abbreviated Final EIS--132 pages and maps, Conceptual Engineering Drawings--CD-ROM, January 5, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-09-01-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Utah KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/16373305?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-05&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TOOELE+COUNTY+MIDVALLEY+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=TOOELE+COUNTY+MIDVALLEY+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salt Lake City, Utah; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 5, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Evaluating the Impact of Transit Service on Parking Demand and Requirements AN - 968168897; 16436353 AB - Many jurisdictions in the United States typically set minimum parking requirements for residential multifamily developments based on old data that were collected in suburban settings with little transit availability. Such parking requirements applied to urban settings with adequate transit service often result in an oversupply of parking, which in turn creates a barrier to smart growth. Not only does the oversupply of parking encourage automobile use and reduce housing affordability, but it also increases development costs, consumes land and natural resources, and increases associated air and water pollution. This research examines the relationship of parking demand and transit service in First Hill-Capitol Hill (FHCH) and Redmond, two urban centers in King County, Washington. An alternative method to collect parking demand data is explored. The results show a strong relationship between transit service and parking demand. The FHCH urban center, which abuts downtown Seattle, exhibited higher levels of transit service and lower parking demand. Parking demand in FHCH was observed to be 0.52 parking space per dwelling unit, which was about 50% less than parking demand observed in Redmond, a growing mixed-use suburban center, and 50% less than data reported by the Institute of Transportation Engineers. After a review of the parking policies of each urban center, opportunities to improve regulations-including adjusting minimum parking requirements and allowing for reductions in required parking when developers implement solutions to reduce demand for parking-were identified. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Rowe, Daniel H AU - Bae, C-H Christine AU - Shen, Qing AD - King County Metro Transit, Department of Transportation, 201 South Jackson Street, Seattle, WA 98104, daniel.rowe@kingcounty.gov PY - 2011 SP - 56 EP - 62 PB - Transportation Research Board VL - 2 IS - 2245 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Pollution Abstracts; Sustainability Science Abstracts KW - Air pollution KW - Transportation KW - Housing KW - Natural resources KW - Reviews KW - Jurisdiction KW - INE, USA, Washington, Seattle KW - Land use KW - Urban areas KW - M3 1010:Issues in Sustainable Development KW - P 2000:FRESHWATER POLLUTION UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/968168897?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Assamodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.atitle=Evaluating+the+Impact+of+Transit+Service+on+Parking+Demand+and+Requirements&rft.au=Rowe%2C+Daniel+H%3BBae%2C+C-H+Christine%3BShen%2C+Qing&rft.aulast=Rowe&rft.aufirst=Daniel&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=2&rft.issue=2245&rft.spage=56&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2245-07 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-04-01 N1 - Number of references - 22 N1 - Last updated - 2016-01-21 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Air pollution; Transportation; Housing; Reviews; Natural resources; Jurisdiction; Land use; Urban areas; INE, USA, Washington, Seattle DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2245-07 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Pile Load Test and Implementation of Specifications of Load and Resistance Factor Design Case Study of Caminada Bay Bridge Project in Louisiana AN - 963896482; 16003216 AB - An instrumented pile load test was performed as part of the foundation design for the Caminada Bay Bridge project in south Louisiana. Both static and dynamic load tests were performed. The load-transfer curve of the test pile was obtained from strain measurements by using sister bar strain gauges at six locations along the pile shaft. The test pile resistance was determined by the Tomlinson method for cohesive soils and by the Nordlund method for cohesionless soils. The dynamic and the static load testing results indicated the test pile did not achieve the desired design resistance. The static analysis model was calibrated on the basis of observations of the pile load testing program. The design pile length was revised to benefit from the shallower scour depths for the revised pile design. The low resistance of the test pile resulted in the engineer's decision to use dynamic testing on the production piles to ensure adequate resistances. Taking advantage of the static load test of the instrumented test pile instead of simply using the smaller resistance factor from dynamic tests, the engineer combined the results of the two test methods and used a combination of resistance factors from both the static and dynamic load tests. This paper presents the evaluation of load test results and the rationale used for the selection of the resistance factor. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Yoon, Sungmin AU - Tsai, Ching AU - Melton, James Matt AD - Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development, 1201 Capitol Access Road, Baton Rouge, LA 70804 seanyoon@live.com Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 SP - 23 EP - 33 PB - Transportation Research Board IS - 2212 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Environmental Engineering Abstracts (EN); CSA / ASCE Civil Engineering Abstracts (CE) UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/963896482?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aenvironmentalengabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.atitle=Pile+Load+Test+and+Implementation+of+Specifications+of+Load+and+Resistance+Factor+Design+Case+Study+of+Caminada+Bay+Bridge+Project+in+Louisiana&rft.au=Yoon%2C+Sungmin%3BTsai%2C+Ching%3BMelton%2C+James+Matt&rft.aulast=Yoon&rft.aufirst=Sungmin&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=2212&rft.spage=23&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2212-03 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-04-01 N1 - Last updated - 2012-04-27 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2212-03 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Traffic Sign Sight Distance for Low-Volume Roads AN - 963895854; 16003162 AB - Warning signs are a critical signaling element providing information to the monitoring public with respect to potential hazards on the roadway. They should be placed in order to allow the driver enough time to perceive, identify, and decide on and perform any necessary maneuvers. Although stopping-sight distance is adequate for most design situations, some situations require drivers to perform complex maneuvers or make immediate decisions, such as when drivers must respond to an unexpected maneuver, for example, at an intersection or dangerous curve. In these areas, the sight distance of a warning sign is of fundamental importance so as to allow drivers to respond appropriately and to perform the proper maneuver. The placement of the road sign is an integral part of road design; in fact, its correct definition, or rather the choice of the location of the different signs in relation to the geometrical and functional characteristics of the road, represents one of the fundamental tools for improvement of road safety. Such a concept is extremely important for existing roads and, in particular, for those with a low traffic transit. The effectiveness of the sign is subordinate to its perception-response time and therefore to the capacity to influence drivers' speed in order to make it compatible with the road geometry. Therefore, a mathematical model was specifically developed to investigate the relationship between sight distance and sign location according to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. To carry out this analysis, a survey was performed on warning curves with inadequate sight distance by using traffic counters capable of recording the 85th percentile speed of vehicles. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Discetti, Paolo AU - Lamberti, Renato AD - Department of Transportation Engineering Luigi Tocchetti, University of Naples Federico II, Via Claudia 21, 1-80125 Naples, Italy discetti@unina.it Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 SP - 64 EP - 70 PB - Transportation Research Board VL - 1 IS - 2203 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Environmental Engineering Abstracts (EN); CSA / ASCE Civil Engineering Abstracts (CE) KW - Decisions KW - Drivers KW - Maneuvers KW - Position (location) KW - Roads KW - Traffic engineering KW - Traffic flow KW - Warning UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/963895854?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aenvironmentalengabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.atitle=Traffic+Sign+Sight+Distance+for+Low-Volume+Roads&rft.au=Discetti%2C+Paolo%3BLamberti%2C+Renato&rft.aulast=Discetti&rft.aufirst=Paolo&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=1&rft.issue=2203&rft.spage=64&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2203-08 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-04-01 N1 - Last updated - 2013-05-09 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2203-08 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Reducing Traffic Injuries Resulting from Excess Speed Low-Cost Gateway Treatments in Italy AN - 963875531; 16003166 AB - This study investigates drivers' speed behavior on low-volume roads crossing small urban communities both without a gateway or traffic-calming device and with different forms of gateway and traffic calming along the urban environment. Speeds upon entering small urban areas in Italy were collected along several rural road sections. The site with the greater operating speeds was selected as the design site. Two gateways and integrated traffic-calming devices along the road were set up within the urban area. The gateways aimed to slow the vehicles entering the built-up area, and the traffic-calming devices aimed to complement the gateway effect. The proposed gateway design is a combination of low-cost and fast implementation measures. The traffic-calming treatments presented in the study could easily be implemented in other rural communities. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Dell'Acqua, Gianluca AD - Department of Transportation Engineering Luigi Toochetti, University of Naples Federico II, Via Claudio 21, 1-80125 Naples, Italy gianluca.dellacqua@unina.it Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 SP - 94 EP - 99 PB - Transportation Research Board VL - 1 IS - 2203 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Environmental Engineering Abstracts (EN); CSA / ASCE Civil Engineering Abstracts (CE) KW - Communities KW - Complement KW - Devices KW - Roads KW - Rural communities KW - Rural roads KW - Transportation KW - Urban areas UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/963875531?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aenvironmentalengabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.atitle=Reducing+Traffic+Injuries+Resulting+from+Excess+Speed+Low-Cost+Gateway+Treatments+in+Italy&rft.au=Dell%27Acqua%2C+Gianluca&rft.aulast=Dell%27Acqua&rft.aufirst=Gianluca&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=1&rft.issue=2203&rft.spage=94&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2203-12 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-04-01 N1 - Last updated - 2013-05-09 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2203-12 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Speed Table Evaluation and Speed Modeling for Low-Volume Crosstown Roads AN - 963875511; 16003165 AB - More than 50% of injury accidents in Spain take place on crosstown roads in urban areas. Traffic calming is an initiative to reduce the impact of traffic on local streets by lowering both the number and the severity of crashes. However, the implementation of traffic-calming devices in Spain was not standardized in the past, and no technical criteria were applied. The paper presents the methodology, results, and conclusions of an analysis specifically related to speed tables, which are flat-topped speed humps, as part of the research project MODETRA. For the research, five low-volume crosstown roads with 16 speed tables were selected to analyze drivers' behavior. Speed data were collected from a sample of more than 900 vehicles through the selected crosstown roads using Global Positioning System trackers. For each individual vehicle, a continuous speed profile along the path was obtained. The analysis showed that the minimum speed occurred when the vehicle left the traffic-calming device and the maximum deceleration occurred just before the device. Geometric characteristics of the speed tables were measured by using a digital profilometer. A wide dispersion in the geometry can be concluded. It was found that the speed reduction depended mainly on the separation between traffic-calming devices, whereas the speed over the speed tables depended crucially on the entrance-ramp slope, the speed table length, and the distance from the previous traffic control device. Also, no statistical correlations were found between speed table height and speed reduction or spot speed over the speed table. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Tsui Moreno, Ana AU - Garcia, Alfredo AU - Alfonso Romero, Mario AD - Department of Transportation, Universidad Politecnica de Valencia, Camino de Vera, s/n 46022, Valencia, Spain Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 SP - 85 EP - 93 PB - Transportation Research Board VL - 1 IS - 2203 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Environmental Engineering Abstracts (EN); CSA / ASCE Civil Engineering Abstracts (CE) KW - Devices KW - Reduction KW - Roads KW - Statistical methods KW - Tables KW - Tables (data) KW - Urban areas KW - Vehicles UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/963875511?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aenvironmentalengabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.atitle=Speed+Table+Evaluation+and+Speed+Modeling+for+Low-Volume+Crosstown+Roads&rft.au=Tsui+Moreno%2C+Ana%3BGarcia%2C+Alfredo%3BAlfonso+Romero%2C+Mario&rft.aulast=Tsui+Moreno&rft.aufirst=Ana&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=1&rft.issue=2203&rft.spage=85&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2203-11 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-04-01 N1 - Last updated - 2013-05-09 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2203-11 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Nine Steps to Constructing High-Quality Chip Seals AN - 963855917; 16003188 AB - If chip seals are constructed properly, they are a cost-effective means of extending the useable life of hot-mix asphalt pavements. Over the years, chip seals have been criticized because they sometimes do not perform as expected. This paper discusses the steps necessary to build chip seals that perform well, including project selection, specifications, material quality, and construction methods. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Wood, Thomas J AU - Olson, Roger C AD - Minnesota Department of Transportation, 1400 Gervais Avenue, Maplewood MN 55109 thomas.wood@state.mn.us Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 SP - 54 EP - 57 PB - Transportation Research Board VL - 2 IS - 2204 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Environmental Engineering Abstracts (EN); CSA / ASCE Civil Engineering Abstracts (CE) UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/963855917?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aenvironmentalengabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.atitle=Nine+Steps+to+Constructing+High-Quality+Chip+Seals&rft.au=Wood%2C+Thomas+J%3BOlson%2C+Roger+C&rft.aulast=Wood&rft.aufirst=Thomas&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=2&rft.issue=2204&rft.spage=54&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2204-07 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-04-01 N1 - Last updated - 2012-04-27 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2204-07 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Applying Emerging Private-Sector Probe-Based Speed Data in the National Capital Region's Planning Processes AN - 954658647; 16415827 AB - Public-sector applications of emerging private-sector probe-based travel time and speed data have been mainly for real-time traffic operations and incident and special events management; such data have rarely been used for metropolitan planning organizations' planning programs or processes. Using data from the 1-95 Corridor Coalition Vehicle Probe Project in the National Capital Region, this paper explores the possible planning applications of such operations data, including the congestion management process, management and operations planning, air-quality conformity analysis, and travel demand modeling. The paper demonstrates several important probe data-based performance measures in metropolitan transportation planning, especially for areas without comprehensive traffic detection systems. It also summarizes the advantages and caveats of the probe data and lessons learned from the experience. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Meese, Andrew J AU - Pu, Wenjing AD - Department of Transportation Planning, Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, 777 North Capitol Street, NE, Suite 300, Washington, D C 20002, wpu@mwcog.org Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 SP - 17 EP - 26 PB - Transportation Research Board IS - 2243 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Pollution Abstracts KW - Travel KW - Transportation KW - traffic KW - traffic management KW - Air quality KW - P 9999:GENERAL POLLUTION UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/954658647?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Apollution&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.atitle=Applying+Emerging+Private-Sector+Probe-Based+Speed+Data+in+the+National+Capital+Region%27s+Planning+Processes&rft.au=Meese%2C+Andrew+J%3BPu%2C+Wenjing&rft.aulast=Meese&rft.aufirst=Andrew&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=2243&rft.spage=17&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2243-03 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-03-01 N1 - Number of references - 20 N1 - Last updated - 2015-03-19 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Travel; traffic; Transportation; traffic management; Air quality DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2243-03 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Relation of Flow, Speed, and Density of Urban Freeways to Functional Form of a Safety Performance Function AN - 926903881; 16330451 AB - Constructive discussion of the appropriate choice for the functional form of safety performance functions (SPFs) is generally absent from research literature on road safety. Among researchers who develop SPFs, there appears to be a consensus that the underlying randomness in accident counts is well described by the negative binomial (NB) distribution. The underlying phenomenon itself, however, is not well understood and is rarely discussed. The choice of the regression equation is usually not explained or documented. Researchers most commonly use the power function, possibly because most generalized linear modeling (GLM) statistical packages can accommodate the power function with little effort. The modeling process, however statistically rigorous, at times seems disconnected from the physical phenomenon that it is trying to describe. The disconnect, however, has attracted only limited interest from researchers to date. Accidents on an urban freeway are a by-product of traffic flow; therefore, changes in the flow parameters may give clues about the probability of accident occurrence and changes in accident frequency. This study related traffic flow parameters, such as speed and density, to the choice of the functional form of the SPF. It compared SPF models for urban freeways developed with sigmoid and exponential functional forms with the use of data from Colorado and California and contrasted the cumulative residual (CURE) plots of the models. SPFs developed around a sigmoid functional form through the use of neural network (NN) methodology suggested underlying relationships between safety and traffic flow characteristics. CURE plots for NN-generated SPFs generally showed a better-quality model fit when compared with power-function SPFs, which were developed in the GLM framework with an NB error structure. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Kononov, Jake AU - Lyon, Craig AU - Allery, Bryan K AD - Colorado Department of Transportation, 4201 East Arkansas Avenue, Denver, CO 80222, Jake.Kononov@dot.state.co.us Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 SP - 11 EP - 19 PB - Transportation Research Board IS - 2236 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Health & Safety Science Abstracts KW - Artificial intelligence KW - USA, Colorado KW - Accidents KW - Transportation KW - Byproducts KW - USA, California KW - neural networks KW - Highways KW - Flow rates KW - traffic safety KW - H 2000:Transportation UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/926903881?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ahealthsafetyabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.atitle=Relation+of+Flow%2C+Speed%2C+and+Density+of+Urban+Freeways+to+Functional+Form+of+a+Safety+Performance+Function&rft.au=Kononov%2C+Jake%3BLyon%2C+Craig%3BAllery%2C+Bryan+K&rft.aulast=Kononov&rft.aufirst=Jake&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=2236&rft.spage=11&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2236-02 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-03-01 N1 - Number of references - 10 N1 - Last updated - 2015-03-19 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Artificial intelligence; Accidents; Transportation; Byproducts; neural networks; Highways; traffic safety; Flow rates; USA, Colorado; USA, California DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2236-02 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Conflict Models for Single-Lane Roundabout Slip Lanes from Microsimulation Development and Validation AN - 926890830; 16330460 AB - Conflict patterns at single-lane roundabouts with and without slip lanes were evaluated and compared through VISSEVI, the microscopic simulation program for multimodal traffic flow modeling, and surrogate safety assessment model (SSAM) analysis. From a sensitivity analysis of several volume distribution scenarios of the percentage of turning traffic, five zone-based conflict prediction models were developed through the use of Poisson regression. The models captured simulated conflict differences that resulted from the addition of a right-turn slip lane. The models were evaluated under three exit control scenarios (yield, stop, and free-flow merge). With SSAM analysis, the models predicted the occurrence of conflicts for roundabout zones with different R-squared values, which ranged from.69 to.97. The models were compared with national and international crash prediction models for single-lane roundabouts and were further validated by actual crash data from 10 single-lane roundabouts in the city of Carmel, Indiana. The number of conflicts for a single-lane roundabout was predicted as a function of approach entry, circulation, and slip lane traffic flows and was determined to be sensitive to the slip lane exit type. Results confirmed that conflicts in the merge area were more frequent than in the roundabout approach area and that the installation of a free-flow slip lane exit type reduced overall conflict occurrence. The results demonstrated the usefulness of SSAM analysis for evaluating roundabout safety and developing an empirical relationship between simulated conflicts and field-observed crashes. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Al-Ghandour, Majed N AU - Schroeder, Bastian J AU - Williams, Billy M AU - Rasdorf, William J AD - North Carolina Department of Transportation, Program Development Branch, 1 South Wilmington Street, Raleigh, NC 27601-1453 Y1 - 2011///0, PY - 2011 DA - 0, 2011 SP - 92 EP - 101 PB - Transportation Research Board IS - 2236 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Environmental Engineering Abstracts (EN); CSA / ASCE Civil Engineering Abstracts (CE) KW - Crashes KW - Mathematical models KW - Lanes KW - Computer simulation KW - Traffic flow KW - Slip KW - Regression analysis KW - Roundabouts UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/926890830?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aenvironmentalengabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.atitle=Conflict+Models+for+Single-Lane+Roundabout+Slip+Lanes+from+Microsimulation+Development+and+Validation&rft.au=Al-Ghandour%2C+Majed+N%3BSchroeder%2C+Bastian+J%3BWilliams%2C+Billy+M%3BRasdorf%2C+William+J&rft.aulast=Al-Ghandour&rft.aufirst=Majed&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=2236&rft.spage=92&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2236-11 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-06-01 N1 - Number of references - 17 N1 - Last updated - 2016-10-04 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2236-11 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Application of Cashew Nut Shell Liquid in Bituminous Priming of Low-Volume Roads in Ceara, Brazil AN - 912920653; 16003243 AB - Volatile organic compounds are an environmental concern in the asphalt paving industry. A main pollution source is the so-called cutbacks (asphalts with solvents) frequently applied in the priming of base layers. In Brazil, the cutback MC-30 with kerosene is frequently used. However, the use of cutbacks has been restricted in some countries in which environmental legislation is stricter. This has led to the search for alternative materials to substitute for conventional cutbacks. This paper investigates the potential use of a mixture produced from cashew nut shell liquid (CNSL) and asphalt cement (AC) as the prime coat. The purpose is to obtain a less environmentally aggressive bituminous prime coat product. To verify the performance of the prime in sandy soils, 240 specimens were produced and primed with different products: the cutback MC-30, an emulsion MS-1C, and a mixture produced in the laboratory called AC/CNSL (60% AC 50/70 and 40% CNSL). Experimental results have shown that the prime coat is a complex material affected by factors such as the type and the rate of the applied binder, preparation conditions of the base surface, and moisture content in compaction. Results indicated the potential use of the AC/CNSL in compacted sand samples. The product can satisfactorily be used as a cutback, and it attends the parameter of penetration in the base layer. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - De Araujo Barroso, Suelly Helena AU - Rabelo, Antonio Nobre AU - Soares, Jorge Barbosa AD - Department of Transportation Engineering, Federal University of Ceara, Campus do Pici, S/N-B 703, Brazil, suelly@det.ufc.br Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 SP - 130 EP - 137 PB - Transportation Research Board VL - 3 IS - 2205 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Sustainability Science Abstracts KW - Brazil, Ceara KW - asphalt KW - Transportation KW - Cement KW - Sand KW - Solvents KW - Kerosene KW - Anacardium KW - Emulsions KW - Legislation KW - Volatile organic compounds KW - M3 1010:Issues in Sustainable Development UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/912920653?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Assamodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.atitle=Application+of+Cashew+Nut+Shell+Liquid+in+Bituminous+Priming+of+Low-Volume+Roads+in+Ceara%2C+Brazil&rft.au=De+Araujo+Barroso%2C+Suelly+Helena%3BRabelo%2C+Antonio+Nobre%3BSoares%2C+Jorge+Barbosa&rft.aulast=De+Araujo+Barroso&rft.aufirst=Suelly&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=3&rft.issue=2205&rft.spage=130&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2205-17 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2011-12-01 N1 - Last updated - 2015-03-19 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Transportation; asphalt; Cement; Sand; Solvents; Kerosene; Emulsions; Volatile organic compounds; Legislation; Anacardium; Brazil, Ceara DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2205-17 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Road Performance Evaluation Using Geometric Consistency and Pavement Distress Data AN - 912919535; 16003178 AB - Many studies on driver speed behavior are found in the scientific literature today, and various researchers have addressed roadway alignment consistency for travel safety in the context of current operating speeds. An experimental analysis of low-volume roads without spiral transition curves between geometric tangent and circular elements on the horizontal alignment was conducted in southern Italy. All selected roadways are located in areas with level terrain and vertical grades of less than 6 %. This study is a continuation of a 2009 research project that developed procedures to predict speed factors for horizontal curves and tangents on low-volume roads. The present research focuses on the design of continuous operating speed profiles that reproduce real driver speed behavior at each section of the horizontal alignment with variables that now include the pavement deterioration condition. Four new regression equations were developed to predict the operating speed on tangent and circular curve elements by using speed factors and geometric variables. These models were developed by a traditional ordinary least-squares method involving speed values not surveyed in transition zones. The aim of this refined study is to illustrate the roadway factors influencing optimal and safe driving performance. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Dell'Acqua, Gianluca AU - Russo, Francesca AD - Department of Transportation Engineering Luigi Tocchetti, University of Naples Federico II, Via Claudio 21, 1-80125 Naples, Italy, francesca.russo2@unina.it Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 SP - 194 EP - 202 PB - Transportation Research Board VL - 1 IS - 2203 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Health & Safety Science Abstracts KW - Travel KW - safety engineering KW - Transportation KW - driving ability KW - Highways KW - Italy KW - H 2000:Transportation UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/912919535?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ahealthsafetyabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.atitle=Road+Performance+Evaluation+Using+Geometric+Consistency+and+Pavement+Distress+Data&rft.au=Dell%27Acqua%2C+Gianluca%3BRusso%2C+Francesca&rft.aulast=Dell%27Acqua&rft.aufirst=Gianluca&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=1&rft.issue=2203&rft.spage=194&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2203-24 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2011-12-01 N1 - Last updated - 2015-03-19 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Travel; Transportation; safety engineering; driving ability; Highways; Italy DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2203-24 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Forensic Investigation and Remediation of Pavement Performance Affected by Groundwater Seepage Case History in Virginia AN - 912919098; 16003220 AB - Inadequate drainage of surface water, subsurface water, or both can have a significant impact on pavement performance and long-term maintenance costs. This paper discusses how groundwater (subsurface water) that is not adequately controlled can negatively affect the performance of pavement functionality. Forensic methods used to identify the sources of groundwater and measures that are taken to remediate the problem are explained. Forensic investigation revealed that serious consideration in the design of pavements must be given to regional groundwater conditions and the impact possible on both the integrity and the functionality of the pavement and thus on the safety and the comfort of the traveling public. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Daoulas, John AU - Elfino, Mohamed AU - Nair, Harikrishnan AU - Nelson, Sean AD - Virginia Department of Transportation, 14D1 East Broad Street, Richmond, VA 23219, harikrishnan.nair@vdot.virginia.gov Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 SP - 65 EP - 73 PB - Transportation Research Board IS - 2212 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Pollution Abstracts KW - Transportation KW - safety engineering KW - Bioremediation KW - Surface water KW - Drainage KW - drainage water KW - USA, Virginia KW - seepages KW - Groundwater KW - Maintenance KW - P 2000:FRESHWATER POLLUTION UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/912919098?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Apollution&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.atitle=Forensic+Investigation+and+Remediation+of+Pavement+Performance+Affected+by+Groundwater+Seepage+Case+History+in+Virginia&rft.au=Daoulas%2C+John%3BElfino%2C+Mohamed%3BNair%2C+Harikrishnan%3BNelson%2C+Sean&rft.aulast=Daoulas&rft.aufirst=John&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=2212&rft.spage=65&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2212-07 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2011-12-01 N1 - Last updated - 2015-03-19 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Bioremediation; safety engineering; Transportation; Surface water; Drainage; drainage water; seepages; Groundwater; Maintenance; USA, Virginia DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2212-07 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - The Effects Of Stressors, Living Support, And Adjustment On Learning Performance Of International Students In Taiwan AN - 902085183; 201122154 AB - More students are receiving education in countries other than their homeland and having received education overseas in well-developed countries it is widely recognized as a career asset. International education entails an important set of multicultural life experiences that can enhance future career performances. In this research we investigated factors that influence the learning performance of international students in Taiwan. We examined the relationships between stressor adjustment, social support adjustment, and learning performance. The findings could be used by educational institutions and international students to understand and improve upon the factors that influence learning performance. Adapted from the source document. JF - Social Behavior and Personality AU - Hwang, Kevin P AU - Wang, Ming-Kuen AU - Sodanine, Saing AD - Department of Transportation and Communication Management Science, National Cheng Kung University, No.1 University Road, Tainan City 701, Taiwan, ROC Phone: +886-6-336498; Fax: +886-6-2753882 hwangis@mail.ncku.edu.tw Y1 - 2011///0, PY - 2011 DA - 0, 2011 SP - 333 EP - 344 PB - Society for Personality Research, Palmerston North, New Zealand VL - 39 IS - 3 SN - 0301-2212, 0301-2212 KW - stressors, social support, adjustment, learning performance, international students KW - Taiwan KW - Learning KW - Academic Achievement KW - Careers KW - Multicultural Education KW - Stress KW - Social Support KW - Students KW - Adjustment KW - article KW - 0312: social psychology; personality & social roles (individual traits, social identity, adjustment, conformism, & deviance) UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/902085183?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Asocabs&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Social+Behavior+and+Personality&rft.atitle=The+Effects+Of+Stressors%2C+Living+Support%2C+And+Adjustment+On+Learning+Performance+Of+International+Students+In+Taiwan&rft.au=Hwang%2C+Kevin+P%3BWang%2C+Ming-Kuen%3BSodanine%2C+Saing&rft.aulast=Hwang&rft.aufirst=Kevin&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=39&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=333&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Social+Behavior+and+Personality&rft.issn=03012212&rft_id=info:doi/10.2224%2Fsbp.2011.39.3.333 LA - English DB - Sociological Abstracts N1 - Date revised - 2014-02-21 N1 - Number of references - 11 N1 - Last updated - 2016-09-28 N1 - CODEN - SBHPAF N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Learning; Stress; Adjustment; Careers; Taiwan; Academic Achievement; Students; Social Support; Multicultural Education DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2011.39.3.333 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - When may road fatalities start to decrease? AN - 867737134; 14602328 AB - The comparative analysis of macroscopic trends in road safety has been a popular research topic. The objective of this research is to propose a simple and, at the same time, reliable multiple regime model framework for international road safety comparisons, allowing for the identification of slope changes of personal risk curves and respective breakpoints. Method: The trends of road traffic fatalities in several EU countries have been examined through the temporal evolution of elementary socioeconomic indicators, namely motorized vehicle fleet and population, at the country level. Results: Piece-wise linear regression models have been fitted, using a methodology that allows the simultaneous estimation of all slopes and breakpoints. The number and location of breakpoints, as well as the slope of the connecting trends, vary among countries, thus indicating different road safety evolution patterns. Impact on industry: Macroscopic analysis of road accident trends may be proved beneficial for the identification of best examples and the implementation of appropriate programmes and measures, which will lead to important benefits for the society and the economy through the reduction of road fatalities and injuries. Best performing countries and the related programmes and measures adopted may concern several safety improvements at the processes of the road, the vehicle and the insurance industries. Conclusions: Lessons from the analysis of the past road safety patterns of developed countries provide some insight into the underlying process that relates motorization levels with personal risk and can prove to be beneficial for predicting the road safety evolution of developing countries that may have not yet reached the same breakpoints. Furthermore, the presented framework may serve as a basis to build more elaborate models, including more reliable exposure indicators (such as vehicle-km driven). Research Highlights: A simple and reliable multiple regime model framework for international road safety comparisons is presented in this paper. The methodology allows the identification of slope changes of personal risk curves and respective break-points. Lessons from the analysis of the past road safety patterns can be proved beneficial for predicting the road safety evolution of developing countries. JF - Journal of Safety Research AU - Yannis, George AU - Antoniou, Constantinos AU - Papadimitriou, Eleonora AU - Katsochis, Dimitris AD - National Technical University of Athens, Department of Transportation Planning and Engineering, 5 Iroon Polytechniou Street, 157 73 Zografou, Athens, Greece Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 SP - 17 EP - 25 PB - Elsevier Science, P.O. Box 800 Kidlington Oxford OX5 1DX UK VL - 42 IS - 1 SN - 0022-4375, 0022-4375 KW - Risk Abstracts; Health & Safety Science Abstracts KW - Mortality KW - Socioeconomics KW - Insurance KW - Accidents KW - traffic KW - Economics KW - Developing countries KW - traffic safety KW - developed countries KW - H 2000:Transportation KW - R2 23060:Medical and environmental health UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/867737134?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ariskabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Journal+of+Safety+Research&rft.atitle=When+may+road+fatalities+start+to+decrease%3F&rft.au=Yannis%2C+George%3BAntoniou%2C+Constantinos%3BPapadimitriou%2C+Eleonora%3BKatsochis%2C+Dimitris&rft.aulast=Yannis&rft.aufirst=George&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=42&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=17&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Journal+of+Safety+Research&rft.issn=00224375&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016%2Fj.jsr.2010.11.003 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2011-05-01 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-29 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Mortality; Accidents; traffic; Economics; Socioeconomics; Insurance; Developing countries; traffic safety; developed countries DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2010.11.003 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Ordovician geology in recent road cuts of Jefferson County Missouri AN - 1849303298; 2016-104663 JF - Field Trip Guidebook - Association of Missouri Geologists Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 EP - unpaginated PB - Association of Missouri Geologists, Rolla, MO VL - 58 KW - United States KW - hydrology KW - mines KW - lithostratigraphy KW - petrology KW - Paleozoic KW - Missouri KW - guidebook KW - field trips KW - areal geology KW - mineral resources KW - road log KW - Jefferson County Missouri KW - Ordovician KW - stratigraphic units KW - 13:Areal geology UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1849303298?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ageorefmodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Field+Trip+Guidebook+-+Association+of+Missouri+Geologists&rft.atitle=Ordovician+geology+in+recent+road+cuts+of+Jefferson+County+Missouri&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=58&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Field+Trip+Guidebook+-+Association+of+Missouri+Geologists&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://www.missourigeologists.org/Meeting2011/AMGguidebook2011.pdf http://www.missourigeologists.org/FieldtripsandGuidebooks.htm LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2016, American Geosciences Institute. N1 - Date revised - 2016-01-01 N1 - Number of references - 9 N1 - PubXState - MO N1 - Document feature - illus. incl. sketch maps N1 - SuppNotes - Field trip from the Association of Missouri Geologists, 58th annual meeting, Festus, MO, Sept. 30-Oct. 1, 2011; accessed on June 16, 2014 N1 - Last updated - 2016-12-16 N1 - CODEN - #06604 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - areal geology; field trips; guidebook; hydrology; Jefferson County Missouri; lithostratigraphy; mineral resources; mines; Missouri; Ordovician; Paleozoic; petrology; road log; stratigraphic units; United States ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Identifying Promising Highway Segments for Safety Improvement Through Speed Management AN - 1777139414; 16004561 AB - Speed variation is closely related to the occurrence of traffic crashes. Thus, speed management strategies that reduce speed variation are expected to reduce crash frequency and not only improve safety but also prevent congestion due to crash occurrence. This study developed a modeling approach to identify promising road segments for safety improvement through speed management strategies and to illustrate how to select segments on the basis of model results. With the application of four statistical techniques (generalized additive model, negative binomial model, linear model, and empirical Bayes method) in three sequential steps to data collected on a 190-km section of expressway in South Korea, the study developed empirical models for selecting promising segments for safety improvement by the speed management strategies. This paper presents the five most-promising segments for implementing such strategies. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Kweon, Young-Jun AU - Oh, Cheol AD - Virginia Center for Transportation Innovation and Research, Virginia Department of Transportation, 530 Edgemont Road, Charlottesville, VA 22903 Y1 - 2011///0, PY - 2011 DA - 0, 2011 SP - 46 EP - 52 PB - Transportation Research Board IS - 2213 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Environmental Engineering Abstracts (EN); CSA / ASCE Civil Engineering Abstracts (CE) KW - Crashes KW - Transportation KW - Management KW - Strategy KW - Segments KW - Safety KW - Binomials KW - Empirical analysis UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1777139414?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aenvironmentalengabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.atitle=Identifying+Promising+Highway+Segments+for+Safety+Improvement+Through+Speed+Management&rft.au=Kweon%2C+Young-Jun%3BOh%2C+Cheol&rft.aulast=Kweon&rft.aufirst=Young-Jun&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=2213&rft.spage=46&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-04-01 N1 - Last updated - 2016-05-18 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - SUPPORT SERVICES FOR COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION AN - 1702940853 AB - Space transportation operators interact with a range of organizations that provide services to enable safe and successful transportation activities. New space transportation markets, such as re-supply of space stations and commercial human spaceflight, could drive demand for improved or new support services. This study provides a review of organizations that supply space services in an attempt to understand what services are available in a number of specific categories. Interviews with a number of but not all commercial orbital and suborbital transportation operators help identify any new or improved services that are needed. This study is only a snapshot and is not intended to include all space transportation support service categories or providers. The study focuses primarily on U.S. based service providers but also includes a few notable international providers. JF - Journal of Magnetohydrodynamics and Plasma Research AU - Anonymous Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 SP - 127 EP - 161 CY - Hauppauge PB - Nova Science Publishers, Inc. VL - 16 IS - 1/2 SN - 10834729 KW - Physics--Heat KW - Space stations KW - Services KW - Space exploration KW - Demand UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1702940853?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Apqrl&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Journal+of+Magnetohydrodynamics+and+Plasma+Research&rft.atitle=SUPPORT+SERVICES+FOR+COMMERCIAL+SPACE+TRANSPORTATION&rft.au=Anonymous&rft.aulast=Anonymous&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=16&rft.issue=1%2F2&rft.spage=127&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Journal+of+Magnetohydrodynamics+and+Plasma+Research&rft.issn=10834729&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Central N1 - Copyright - Copyright Nova Science Publishers, Inc. 2011 N1 - Document feature - Tables N1 - Last updated - 2015-08-11 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - EXPERIMENTAL PERMIT PROGRAM REPORT TO COMSTAC AN - 1702940776 AB - An experimental permit is an authorization issued by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to allow an experimental reusable suborbital rocket to launch or reenter. A permit is an alternative to licensing. A permit is valid for a one-year renewable term and allows a permittee to conduct an unlimited number of launches and reentries for a particular suborbital rocket design during that time. Suborbital Rocket means a vehicle, rocket-propelled in whole or in part, intended for flight on a suborbital trajectory, and the thrust of which is greater than its lift for the majority of the rocket-powered portion of ascent. JF - Journal of Magnetohydrodynamics and Plasma Research AU - Anonymous Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 SP - 31 EP - 40 CY - Hauppauge PB - Nova Science Publishers, Inc. VL - 16 IS - 1/2 SN - 10834729 KW - Physics--Heat KW - Permits KW - Space exploration KW - Design KW - Rockets UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1702940776?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Apqrl&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Journal+of+Magnetohydrodynamics+and+Plasma+Research&rft.atitle=EXPERIMENTAL+PERMIT+PROGRAM+REPORT+TO+COMSTAC&rft.au=Anonymous&rft.aulast=Anonymous&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=16&rft.issue=1%2F2&rft.spage=31&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Journal+of+Magnetohydrodynamics+and+Plasma+Research&rft.issn=10834729&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Central N1 - Copyright - Copyright Nova Science Publishers, Inc. 2011 N1 - Document feature - Tables; Photographs; Diagrams N1 - Last updated - 2015-08-11 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION ON THE U.S. ECONOMY AN - 1702940760 AB - The Economic Impact of Commercial Space Transportation on the U.S. Economy is the latest study by the Federal Aviation Administration's Office of Commercial Space Transportation (FAA/AST) of the commercial launch industry's influence on the nation's economy. It quantifies how commercial space transportation is responsible for supporting space- and non-space related industries. The associated industries that commercial space transportation enables include launch vehicle manufacturing, satellite manufacturing, ground equipment manufacturing, satellite services, remote sensing, and distribution industries. Together these industries contribute to production activity, create earnings, and support jobs throughout the United States. The U.S. Department of Commerce's RIMS II economic model is combined with Satellite Industry Association revenue inputs to calculate how the industries influence the three impact metrics in all major U.S. industry groups. JF - Journal of Magnetohydrodynamics and Plasma Research AU - Anonymous Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 SP - 43 EP - 74 CY - Hauppauge PB - Nova Science Publishers, Inc. VL - 16 IS - 1/2 SN - 10834729 KW - Physics--Heat KW - Space exploration KW - Commercial space ventures KW - Economic impact KW - United States--US UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1702940760?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Apqrl&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Journal+of+Magnetohydrodynamics+and+Plasma+Research&rft.atitle=THE+ECONOMIC+IMPACT+OF+COMMERCIAL+SPACE+TRANSPORTATION+ON+THE+U.S.+ECONOMY&rft.au=Anonymous&rft.aulast=Anonymous&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=16&rft.issue=1%2F2&rft.spage=43&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Journal+of+Magnetohydrodynamics+and+Plasma+Research&rft.issn=10834729&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Central N1 - Copyright - Copyright Nova Science Publishers, Inc. 2011 N1 - Document feature - Graphs; Tables; Charts N1 - Last updated - 2015-08-11 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - United States--US ER - TY - JOUR T1 - STATE SUPPORT FOR COMMERCIAL SPACE ACTIVITIES AN - 1702940621 AB - Every state in the union offers a range of incentives to encourage businesses to locate or increase their activities within that specific state. The vast majority of these incentives are financial, most commonly resulting in a lower tax burden or otherwise reducing the costs of conducting business critical activities. Sometimes these incentives target specific industries or even components of specific industries. Incentives of this kind are generally available at both the state and local level. Any business considering locating in a particular state would likely be eligible for benefits from the state, county, or local municipality. JF - Journal of Magnetohydrodynamics and Plasma Research AU - Anonymous Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 SP - 103 EP - 125 CY - Hauppauge PB - Nova Science Publishers, Inc. VL - 16 IS - 1/2 SN - 10834729 KW - Physics--Heat KW - States KW - Incentives KW - Commercial space ventures KW - Transportation UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1702940621?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Apqrl&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Journal+of+Magnetohydrodynamics+and+Plasma+Research&rft.atitle=STATE+SUPPORT+FOR+COMMERCIAL+SPACE+ACTIVITIES&rft.au=Anonymous&rft.aulast=Anonymous&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=16&rft.issue=1%2F2&rft.spage=103&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Journal+of+Magnetohydrodynamics+and+Plasma+Research&rft.issn=10834729&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Central N1 - Copyright - Copyright Nova Science Publishers, Inc. 2011 N1 - Document feature - Tables N1 - Last updated - 2015-08-11 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - FAA COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION: EXPERIMENTAL PERMIT CHECKLISTS AN - 1702940589 AB - The FAA Office of Commercial Space Transportation designed these checklists to assist experimental permit applicants in the application process and to outline permittee responsibilities after receiving a permit. The checklists provide organizational guidance for applicants submitting a permit application package to the FAA. Prospective applicants should read, understand, and cross-reference the complete regulations when completing the application package. Some of the regulatory text has been rephrased in this checklist for the sake of brevity. Where checklist text differs from regulatory text, the regulatory text takes precedence. The regulations can be found at AST's website (http://ast.faa.gov). JF - Journal of Magnetohydrodynamics and Plasma Research AU - Anonymous Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 SP - 15 EP - 30 CY - Hauppauge PB - Nova Science Publishers, Inc. VL - 16 IS - 1/2 SN - 10834729 KW - Physics--Heat KW - Permits KW - Space exploration KW - Responsibilities UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1702940589?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Apqrl&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Journal+of+Magnetohydrodynamics+and+Plasma+Research&rft.atitle=FAA+COMMERCIAL+SPACE+TRANSPORTATION%3A+EXPERIMENTAL+PERMIT+CHECKLISTS&rft.au=Anonymous&rft.aulast=Anonymous&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=16&rft.issue=1%2F2&rft.spage=15&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Journal+of+Magnetohydrodynamics+and+Plasma+Research&rft.issn=10834729&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Central N1 - Name - Federal Aviation Administration--FAA N1 - Copyright - Copyright Nova Science Publishers, Inc. 2011 N1 - Document feature - Tables N1 - Last updated - 2015-08-11 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Building Support for New Transportation Funding and Financing Program Linking Investments to Stakeholder Priorities Through Collaboration and Economic Impact Analysis AN - 1671564189; 16436348 AB - The transportation community is well aware of the universal problem of (a) infrastructure investment needs, associated funding requirements, and the need for more flexible financing approaches and (b) public uncertainty over the efficacy of investing in transportation as opposed to other uses of their money. These are long-standing issues regardless of economic cycles, and they relate to the state of infrastructure needs and shifting economic and demographic patterns as well as public desires for public processes that are fair, equitable, efficient, and transparent. Recognizing these challenges, the Kansas Department of Transportation (DOT) embarked on a multiyear experiment to reinvent transportation planning and project selection processes in an effort to achieve greater support through stakeholder consultation, collaboration, and adoption of improved and expanded methods for ranking and selecting projects that appeal to broader issues of public concern (such as job creation) instead of merely engineering measures of need. Seven years of experimentation in consultation, collaboration, and revising processes provides many lessons for the transportation community that may be applicable in whole or in part for other state or regional transportation agencies. This paper critically examines the methods and tools used by the Kansas DOT, including surveys, road rallies, collaborative planning efforts, social media outreach, economic impact analysis, and expanded project selection processes. Taken together, this work has produced a positive outcome, including the recent funding by the Kansas legislature of a new 10-year transportation improvement program. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Lorenz, Julie AD - Kansas Department of Transportation, 700 Southwest Harrison Street, Topeka, KS 66603. Current affiliation: Burns and McDonnell, 9400 Ward Parkway, Kansas City, MO 64114 jlorenz@burnsmed.com Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 SP - 8 EP - 16 PB - Transportation Research Board VL - 2 IS - 2245 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Environmental Engineering Abstracts (EN); CSA / ASCE Civil Engineering Abstracts (CE) KW - Infrastructure KW - Funding KW - Transportation KW - Investments KW - Communities KW - Financing KW - Consultation KW - Economics UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1671564189?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aenvironmentalengabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.atitle=Building+Support+for+New+Transportation+Funding+and+Financing+Program+Linking+Investments+to+Stakeholder+Priorities+Through+Collaboration+and+Economic+Impact+Analysis&rft.au=Lorenz%2C+Julie&rft.aulast=Lorenz&rft.aufirst=Julie&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=2&rft.issue=2245&rft.spage=8&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2245-02 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-06-01 N1 - Number of references - 2 N1 - Last updated - 2015-04-09 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2245-02 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Analysis of Weigh-in-Motion Data for Truck Weight Grouping in Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide AN - 1671563896; 16490328 AB - The purpose of this study was to evaluate the Virginia Department of Transportation's traffic data plan for implementation of the Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide (MEPDG) with weigh-in-motion (WIM) data from 22 sites in Virginia for 2007 and 2008. The evaluation included an assessment of the WIM data for pavement design and for enforcement of overloaded trucks and the appropriateness of the truck weight groups. Grouping the sites on the basis of average equivalent single-axle loads was notably different from the current truck weight groups and grouping results based on traffic characteristics such as truck volume. Thus, further efforts to suggest a better grouping scheme are needed. For calculating monthly traffic factors, an input to the MEPDG, volume data from WIM sites could lead to biased results. Thus, vehicle classification count data are a better source than WIM data for the factors. The enforcement sites were found to carry heavier trucks in terms of average equivalent single-axle loads than the sites installed for pavement data collection. Thus, the concern that truck weights collected at the enforcement sites might be inappropriate for pavement design because of possible avoidance of the sites by overloaded trucks seems unwarranted. However, because of several factors and limitations, a definitive conclusion regarding this result could not be drawn. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Kweon, Young-Jun AU - Cottrell, Benjamin H, Jr AD - Virginia Center for Transportation Innovation and Research, Virginia Department of Transportation, 530 Edgemont Road, Charlottesville, VA 22903 Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 SP - 169 EP - 178 PB - Transportation Research Board IS - 2256 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Environmental Engineering Abstracts (EN); CSA / ASCE Civil Engineering Abstracts (CE) KW - Equivalence KW - Transportation KW - Pavement design KW - Traffic flow KW - Trucks KW - Traffic engineering KW - Counting KW - Mathematical analysis UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1671563896?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aenvironmentalengabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.atitle=Analysis+of+Weigh-in-Motion+Data+for+Truck+Weight+Grouping+in+Mechanistic-Empirical+Pavement+Design+Guide&rft.au=Kweon%2C+Young-Jun%3BCottrell%2C+Benjamin+H%2C+Jr&rft.aulast=Kweon&rft.aufirst=Young-Jun&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=2256&rft.spage=169&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2256-20 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-06-01 N1 - Number of references - 8 N1 - Last updated - 2015-04-09 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2256-20 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Models of Operating Speeds for Low-Volume Roads AN - 1671468847; 16003181 AB - Recent studies have documented a noticeable disparity between the speeds for which roads are designed and the actual operating speeds. An important reason for driving errors on two-lane rural roads is the misjudgment of the real course of the road by road users. Unfavorable visibility conditions are one of the problems of road infrastructure that can be detected on existing low-volume roads. Therefore an operating speed model was developed to calculate the contribution made by sight distance, and to be a useful tool for planners in the study of the safety of existing roads. Seven low-volume roads in the province of Salerno, Italy, were studied. The study identified operating speeds on 84 curves; the relative sight distance, radius, radius of the previous curve, length of the tangent before the curve, curvature change rate, development of the curve, and number of speed changes made during the study were determined for each curve. Because of the different characteristics of the roads analyzed, once the data were collected it was possible to develop two operative speed models. The first was suitable for roads characterized by consecutive curves alternating with small tangents and the second model was mainly intended for roads characterized by a small number of curves that were preceded and followed by long tangents. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Discetti, Paolo AU - Dell'Acqua, Gianluca AU - Lamberti, Renato AD - Department of Transportation Engineering Luigi Tocchetti, University of Naples Fed-erico II, Via Claudio 21, 1-80125 Naples, Italy discetti@unina.it Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 SP - 219 EP - 225 PB - Transportation Research Board VL - 1 IS - 2203 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Environmental Engineering Abstracts (EN); CSA / ASCE Civil Engineering Abstracts (CE) KW - Transportation KW - Roads KW - Mathematical models KW - Rural roads KW - Tools KW - Tangents KW - Mathematical analysis KW - Curvature UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1671468847?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aenvironmentalengabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.atitle=Models+of+Operating+Speeds+for+Low-Volume+Roads&rft.au=Discetti%2C+Paolo%3BDell%27Acqua%2C+Gianluca%3BLamberti%2C+Renato&rft.aulast=Discetti&rft.aufirst=Paolo&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=1&rft.issue=2203&rft.spage=219&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2203-27 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-04-01 N1 - Last updated - 2015-04-09 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2203-27 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Indirect Skid Resistance Measurement for Porous Asphalt Pavement Management AN - 1671453777; 16003245 AB - This paper focuses on developing a method for road managers to assess the sideways-force coefficient (SFC) in porous asphalt with low-cost standard tests. SFC can be used as a component in road surface condition surveys and asset management decisions. A standard piece of equipment for determining SFC is the sideways-force coefficient routine investigation machine (SCRIM), which can be truck or trailer mounted. This equipment is often beyond the budget of most small, low-volume road agencies. An empirical model for the indirect estimation of SFC for porous road surfaces was developed as a result of this study. With handheld equipment-the portable skid resistance tester [to derive the British pendulum number (BPN)] and the sand patch method [height in sand (HS) test]-a correlation of these test results can be made, and a reasonable approximation to SFC with the use of the SCRIM method can be attained. BPN, the unit of measurement of the skid tester, is a representation of the microroughness of the wearing surface, and the sand patch method (HS test) results yield the macroroughness of the pavement. The study was conducted over 20-km segments of low-volume roadway in southern Italy. The initial results are promising, with a maximum percentage of error of less than 15.2%. Further study is needed to adapt the model to other road surface conditions. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Dell'Acqua, Gianluca AU - De Luca, Mario AU - Lamberti, Renato AD - Department of Transportation Engineering Luigi Tocchetti, University of Naples Federico II, Via Claudia 21, 1-80125 Naples, Italy gianluca.dellacqua@unina.it Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 SP - 147 EP - 154 PB - Transportation Research Board VL - 3 IS - 2205 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Environmental Engineering Abstracts (EN); CSA / ASCE Civil Engineering Abstracts (CE) KW - Pavements KW - Roads KW - Sand KW - Asphalt KW - Skids KW - Standards KW - Trailers KW - Coefficients UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1671453777?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aenvironmentalengabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.atitle=Indirect+Skid+Resistance+Measurement+for+Porous+Asphalt+Pavement+Management&rft.au=Dell%27Acqua%2C+Gianluca%3BDe+Luca%2C+Mario%3BLamberti%2C+Renato&rft.aulast=Dell%27Acqua&rft.aufirst=Gianluca&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=3&rft.issue=2205&rft.spage=147&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2205-19 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-04-01 N1 - Last updated - 2015-04-09 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2205-19 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Evaluation of Passing Process on Two-Lane Rural Highways in Spain with New Methodology Based on Video Data AN - 1671437443; 17259399 AB - Drivers need sufficient passing sight distance (PSD) to pass slower vehicles with safety. This distance can help to improve traffic operation on two-way, two-lane highways. Existing models propose different values of PSD because of different assumptions. In only some cases were these models based on field data of passing maneuvers. This research proposed the design of a methodology to observe passing maneuvers on existing highways with the help of six video cameras installed at a fixed point next to passing sections. The use of more cameras allows complete registration of trajectories along the entire passing zone, with uniform image resolution. The methodology was applied to register a sample of 234 maneuvers on four passing zones. Trajectories of 58 maneuvers were completely described and analyzed with specific restitution software. Results were compared with those from existing PSD models. The distances traveled proposed by the AASHTO model on the left lane were (a) similar to average observed distances when the passed vehicle was one truck and (b) between 50 and 100 m higher when one passenger car was passed. Higher differences, greater than 100 m, were found between measured data and the PSD model (published previously), especially at high design speeds. The observed average speed difference between passing and impeding vehicles was significantly higher than that in any model. Variables with the strongest influence on the time and distance traveled on the opposing lane were the type and speed of the passed vehicle and the length of the passing zone. Left-lane time and distance increase with this length. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Llorca, Carlos AU - Garcia, Alfredo AD - Department of Transportation, Universidad Politecnica de Valencia, Camino de Vera, s/n Valencia, 46022 Spain Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 SP - 42 EP - 51 PB - Transportation Research Board IS - 2262 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Environmental Engineering Abstracts (EN); CSA / ASCE Civil Engineering Abstracts (CE) KW - Mathematical models KW - Lanes KW - Automotive engineering KW - Maneuvers KW - Trajectories KW - Automobiles KW - Highways KW - Methodology UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1671437443?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aenvironmentalengabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.atitle=Evaluation+of+Passing+Process+on+Two-Lane+Rural+Highways+in+Spain+with+New+Methodology+Based+on+Video+Data&rft.au=Llorca%2C+Carlos%3BGarcia%2C+Alfredo&rft.aulast=Llorca&rft.aufirst=Carlos&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=2262&rft.spage=42&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2262-05 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2013-01-01 N1 - Number of references - 19 N1 - Last updated - 2015-04-09 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2262-05 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Operations of Modern Roundabout with Unbalanced Approach Volumes AN - 1671357284; 16629604 AB - This research examined the operations of a four-legged, two-lane modern roundabout with different combinations of approach volumes. Because of the insufficient number of roundabouts to collect field data, experiments were performed with the VISSIM microscopic traffic simulation model. The model's parameters were calibrated with real data collected at a four-legged, two-lane modern roundabout. Different combinations of approach volumes, which ranged from 400 to 1,600 vehicles per hour, were simulated to create relatively high or low traffic demand in one or two approaches. The performance of each roundabout approach was measured by average control delay and level of service. The results of the experiments highlight the potential operational issues of four-legged, two-lane modern roundabouts. The results are presented in three charts that may serve as a quick reference guide for engineers to determine whether a roundabout is a feasible type of intersection control for a given set of design volumes before in-depth engineering analysis is performed. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Valdez, Marilyn AU - Cheu, Ruey Long AU - Duran, Carlos AD - Kentucky Division Office, FHWA, 330 West Broadway, Frankfort, KY 40601 Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 SP - 234 EP - 243 PB - Transportation Research Board IS - 2265 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Environmental Engineering Abstracts (EN); CSA / ASCE Civil Engineering Abstracts (CE) KW - Transportation KW - Computer simulation KW - Design engineering KW - Delay KW - Traffic flow KW - Calibration KW - Traffic engineering KW - Roundabouts UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1671357284?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aenvironmentalengabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.atitle=Operations+of+Modern+Roundabout+with+Unbalanced+Approach+Volumes&rft.au=Valdez%2C+Marilyn%3BCheu%2C+Ruey+Long%3BDuran%2C+Carlos&rft.aulast=Valdez&rft.aufirst=Marilyn&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=2265&rft.spage=234&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2265-26 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-07-01 N1 - Number of references - 22 N1 - Last updated - 2015-04-09 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2265-26 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Evaluating the Benefits of Accelerated Pavement Testing Techniques and Case Studies AN - 1671302090; 16414958 AB - A pilot study was conducted to determine the direct economic benefits of accelerated pavement testing with heavy vehicle simulators in California. The study discusses the identification and comparison of methods used in various countries to determine the benefits from the research. The study highlights approaches in use since the 1990s, compares alternative methods in a global context, and describes the attributes of an economic evaluation methodology applied to benefits from accelerated pavement testing that was initially developed and used in Australia and subsequently enhanced in South Africa. Promising developments include a toolbox created recently in the United States, consisting of more than 30 measures, in which European and Asian transportation research agencies have expressed substantial interest. The pilot study identified a wide variety of methods at state, national, and international levels and found an emphasis on qualitative benefits. Case studies found that the Australian and South African methodology provided advantages such as quantitative, direct economic benefits (a benefit-cost ratio of around 10:1); an analysis of alternative outcomes; accounting for uncertainty; and validation interviews with implementers of research findings. Challenges identified in using this methodology included intensive cost, labor, and time requirements; sensitivity to assumptions; and subjective input. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Nokes, W A AU - Du Plessis, L AU - Mahdavi, M AU - Burmas, N AD - Division of Research and Innovation, California Department of Transportation, 1101 R Street, Sacramento, CA 95811 bill_nokes@dot.ca.gov Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 SP - 147 EP - 154 PB - Transportation Research Board VL - 1 IS - 2225 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Environmental Engineering Abstracts (EN); CSA / ASCE Civil Engineering Abstracts (CE) KW - Pavements KW - Transportation KW - Simulators KW - Accelerated tests KW - Pilots KW - Economics KW - Accounting KW - Methodology UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1671302090?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aenvironmentalengabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.atitle=Evaluating+the+Benefits+of+Accelerated+Pavement+Testing+Techniques+and+Case+Studies&rft.au=Nokes%2C+W+A%3BDu+Plessis%2C+L%3BMahdavi%2C+M%3BBurmas%2C+N&rft.aulast=Nokes&rft.aufirst=W&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=1&rft.issue=2225&rft.spage=147&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2225-16 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-06-01 N1 - Number of references - 29 N1 - Last updated - 2015-04-09 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2225-16 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Accuracy assessment of a regional lidar DEM AN - 1618132017; 2014-084823 JF - Scientific Investigations Report AU - Dokka, Roy K AU - Kent, Joshua D AU - Mitchell, James E AU - Johnson, Kurt L Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 SP - 75 PB - U. S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA SN - 2328-031X, 2328-031X KW - United States KW - laser methods KW - cartography KW - mapping KW - geodesy KW - digital terrain models KW - satellite methods KW - models KW - digital cartography KW - lidar methods KW - applications KW - Louisiana KW - USGS KW - accuracy KW - remote sensing KW - 14:Geologic maps UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1618132017?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ageorefmodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Scientific+Investigations+Report&rft.atitle=Accuracy+assessment+of+a+regional+lidar+DEM&rft.au=Dokka%2C+Roy+K%3BKent%2C+Joshua+D%3BMitchell%2C+James+E%3BJohnson%2C+Kurt+L&rft.aulast=Dokka&rft.aufirst=Roy&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=75&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Scientific+Investigations+Report&rft.issn=2328031X&rft_id=info:doi/10.3133%2Fsir20115053 L2 - http://www.usgs.pubs LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Conference title - U. S. Geological Survey eighth biennial geographic information science workshop and first The National Map users conference N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2014, American Geosciences Institute. N1 - Date revised - 2014-01-01 N1 - PubXState - VA N1 - Last updated - 2014-10-30 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - accuracy; applications; cartography; digital cartography; digital terrain models; geodesy; laser methods; lidar methods; Louisiana; mapping; models; remote sensing; satellite methods; United States; USGS DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/sir20115053 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Mapping coastal wetlands in the National Hydrography Dataset; the Louisiana experience AN - 1618131859; 2014-084855 JF - Scientific Investigations Report AU - Deinert, Sean AU - Mitchell, James E AU - Johnson, Kurt L Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 SP - 91 PB - U. S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA SN - 2328-031X, 2328-031X KW - United States KW - North America KW - National Hydrography Dataset KW - surface water KW - Mississippi Delta KW - data processing KW - mapping KW - Gulf Coastal Plain KW - geographic information systems KW - wetlands KW - data bases KW - coastal environment KW - information systems KW - Louisiana KW - USGS KW - 21:Hydrogeology UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1618131859?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ageorefmodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Scientific+Investigations+Report&rft.atitle=Mapping+coastal+wetlands+in+the+National+Hydrography+Dataset%3B+the+Louisiana+experience&rft.au=Deinert%2C+Sean%3BMitchell%2C+James+E%3BJohnson%2C+Kurt+L&rft.aulast=Deinert&rft.aufirst=Sean&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=91&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Scientific+Investigations+Report&rft.issn=2328031X&rft_id=info:doi/10.3133%2Fsir20115053 L2 - http://www.usgs.pubs LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Conference title - U. S. Geological Survey eighth biennial geographic information science workshop and first The National Map users conference N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2014, American Geosciences Institute. N1 - Date revised - 2014-01-01 N1 - PubXState - VA N1 - Last updated - 2014-10-30 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - coastal environment; data bases; data processing; geographic information systems; Gulf Coastal Plain; information systems; Louisiana; mapping; Mississippi Delta; National Hydrography Dataset; North America; surface water; United States; USGS; wetlands DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/sir20115053 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Building the Louisiana seamless GIS base map AN - 1618131772; 2014-084721 JF - Scientific Investigations Report AU - Deinert, Sean AU - Mitchell, James E Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 SP - 22 PB - U. S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA SN - 2328-031X, 2328-031X KW - United States KW - imagery KW - technology KW - spatial data KW - cartography KW - data processing KW - mapping KW - topography KW - geographic information systems KW - digital cartography KW - data bases KW - information systems KW - Louisiana KW - USGS KW - 14:Geologic maps UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1618131772?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ageorefmodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Scientific+Investigations+Report&rft.atitle=Building+the+Louisiana+seamless+GIS+base+map&rft.au=Deinert%2C+Sean%3BMitchell%2C+James+E&rft.aulast=Deinert&rft.aufirst=Sean&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=22&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Scientific+Investigations+Report&rft.issn=2328031X&rft_id=info:doi/10.3133%2Fsir20115053 L2 - http://www.usgs.pubs LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Conference title - U. S. Geological Survey eighth biennial geographic information science workshop and first The National Map users conference N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2014, American Geosciences Institute. N1 - Date revised - 2014-01-01 N1 - PubXState - VA N1 - Last updated - 2014-10-30 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - cartography; data bases; data processing; digital cartography; geographic information systems; imagery; information systems; Louisiana; mapping; spatial data; technology; topography; United States; USGS DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/sir20115053 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Making the transition from paper to digital maps AN - 1618131442; 2014-084841 JF - Scientific Investigations Report AU - Mitchell, James E AU - Deinert, Sean Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 SP - 85 PB - U. S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA SN - 2328-031X, 2328-031X KW - technology KW - geography KW - geographic information systems KW - digital cartography KW - spatial data KW - cartography KW - mapping KW - information systems KW - USGS KW - digitization KW - 14:Geologic maps UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1618131442?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ageorefmodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Scientific+Investigations+Report&rft.atitle=Making+the+transition+from+paper+to+digital+maps&rft.au=Mitchell%2C+James+E%3BDeinert%2C+Sean&rft.aulast=Mitchell&rft.aufirst=James&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=85&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Scientific+Investigations+Report&rft.issn=2328031X&rft_id=info:doi/10.3133%2Fsir20115053 L2 - http://www.usgs.pubs LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Conference title - U. S. Geological Survey eighth biennial geographic information science workshop and first The National Map users conference N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2014, American Geosciences Institute. N1 - Date revised - 2014-01-01 N1 - PubXState - VA N1 - Last updated - 2014-10-30 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - cartography; digital cartography; digitization; geographic information systems; geography; information systems; mapping; spatial data; technology; USGS DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/sir20115053 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Wells, Nevada M 6.0 earthquake impact on the Nevada Department of Transportation AN - 1524612384; 2014-032885 JF - Special Publication - Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology AU - Murphy, Michael E Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 SP - 365 EP - 376 PB - Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology, Reno, NV SN - 0275-6285, 0275-6285 KW - United States KW - Wells earthquake 2008 KW - geologic hazards KW - government agencies KW - damage KW - transportation KW - Nevada Department of Transportation KW - seismic response KW - structures KW - northeastern Nevada KW - safety KW - seismicity KW - natural hazards KW - bridges KW - infrastructure KW - earthquakes KW - roads KW - Nevada KW - 30:Engineering geology KW - 19:Seismology UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1524612384?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ageorefmodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Special+Publication+-+Nevada+Bureau+of+Mines+and+Geology&rft.atitle=Wells%2C+Nevada+M+6.0+earthquake+impact+on+the+Nevada+Department+of+Transportation&rft.au=Murphy%2C+Michael+E&rft.aulast=Murphy&rft.aufirst=Michael&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=365&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Special+Publication+-+Nevada+Bureau+of+Mines+and+Geology&rft.issn=02756285&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2017, American Geosciences Institute. N1 - Date revised - 2014-01-01 N1 - PubXState - NV N1 - Document feature - illus. incl. sketch maps N1 - SuppNotes - Accessed on Oct. 7, 2013; includes appendix N1 - Last updated - 2017-01-19 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - bridges; damage; earthquakes; geologic hazards; government agencies; infrastructure; natural hazards; Nevada; Nevada Department of Transportation; northeastern Nevada; roads; safety; seismic response; seismicity; structures; transportation; United States; Wells earthquake 2008 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Fault Diagnosis of LPG Tank Car Based on FMEA and RBF Neural Network AN - 1257749958; 17433255 AB - In order to diagnose the fault of the LPG tank for road transportation accurately and roundly, the failure mode and failure index system were founded based on the method of FMEA. Then training samples were constructed according to the daily test data by which the RBF neural network was trained and the diagnosis model was built. At last, to verify the correctness, the model was applied to diagnose the tank's fault. The results show that the diagnosis fault of the model is consistent with the actual fault of tank. So the model based on FMEA and RBF neural network is applicable to the fault diagnosis of hazardous chemical tank. JF - Zhongguo Anquan Kexue Xuebao / China Safety Science Journal AU - Ma, Cheng-Zheng AU - Wang, Hong-De AD - Department of Transportation & Economic Management, Liuzhou Railway Vocational Technical College, Liuzhou Guangxi 545007, China Y1 - 2011/01// PY - 2011 DA - Jan 2011 SP - 99 EP - 104 PB - Zhongguo Laodong Baohu Kexue Jishu Xuehui Bianji Chubanbu, A4, Section 9, Hepingli Dongcheng District Beijing 100013 VL - 21 IS - 1 SN - 1003-3033, 1003-3033 KW - Risk Abstracts; Health & Safety Science Abstracts KW - Artificial intelligence KW - Transportation KW - Neural networks KW - Training KW - R2 23020:Technological risks KW - H 2000:Transportation UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1257749958?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ariskabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Zhongguo+Anquan+Kexue+Xuebao+%2F+China+Safety+Science+Journal&rft.atitle=Fault+Diagnosis+of+LPG+Tank+Car+Based+on+FMEA+and+RBF+Neural+Network&rft.au=Ma%2C+Cheng-Zheng%3BWang%2C+Hong-De&rft.aulast=Ma&rft.aufirst=Cheng-Zheng&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=21&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=99&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Zhongguo+Anquan+Kexue+Xuebao+%2F+China+Safety+Science+Journal&rft.issn=10033033&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - Chinese DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-12-01 N1 - Number of references - 10 N1 - Last updated - 2015-03-19 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Artificial intelligence; Transportation; Training; Neural networks ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Marine Transportation System Statistical Knowledge AN - 1221146560; 17349349 AB - The Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) of the Research and Innovative Technology Administration in the U.S. Department of Transportation collects, manages, and disseminates transportation data, information, and statistical knowledge. Through its maritime program, BTS works to close data gaps and improve statistics in the areas of coastal, ocean, and inland water transportation, including collecting ferry data through the National Census of Ferry Operators and collaborating with federal agencies that are active in ocean and coastal activities through the Maritime Data Working Group. BTS also disseminates statistical knowledge on the marine transportation system through a wide range of data products and publications such as "America's Container Ports: Freight Hubs That Connect Our Nation to Global Markets". JF - Marine Safety and Security Council. Proceedings: the Coast Guard journal of safety at sea AU - Chambers, M AD - Research and Innovative Technology Administration, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, U.S. Department of Transportation, USA Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 SP - 71 EP - 72 VL - 68 IS - 2 SN - 1547-9676, 1547-9676 KW - ASFA Marine Biotechnology Abstracts; ASFA 2: Ocean Technology Policy & Non-Living Resources; Sustainability Science Abstracts; Oceanic Abstracts KW - Marine KW - Inland water KW - Containers KW - Inland waters KW - Data processing KW - Statistics KW - Port installations KW - Security KW - USA KW - Coastal zone KW - Transportation KW - Oceans KW - Census KW - Governments KW - Ferry terminals KW - Marine transportation KW - Coasts KW - Q4 27800:Miscellaneous KW - O 6060:Coastal Zone Resources and Management KW - M3 1010:Issues in Sustainable Development KW - Q2 09124:Coastal zone management UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1221146560?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Assamodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Marine+Safety+and+Security+Council.+Proceedings%3A+the+Coast+Guard+journal+of+safety+at+sea&rft.atitle=Marine+Transportation+System+Statistical+Knowledge&rft.au=Chambers%2C+M&rft.aulast=Chambers&rft.aufirst=M&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=68&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=71&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Marine+Safety+and+Security+Council.+Proceedings%3A+the+Coast+Guard+journal+of+safety+at+sea&rft.issn=15479676&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-11-01 N1 - Last updated - 2014-05-05 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Inland waters; Governments; Ferry terminals; Marine transportation; Statistics; Data processing; Oceans; Census; Coasts; Containers; Inland water; Security; Coastal zone; Transportation; Port installations; USA; Marine ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Analytic Relationships Between Travel Time Reliability Measures AN - 1022847817; 16627667 AB - Travel time reliability is measured in various ways. Measures used in the transportation engineering field include the 90th or 95th percentile travel time, standard deviation, coefficient of variation, percent of variation, buffer index, planning time index, travel time index, skew statistic, misery index, frequency of congestion, and on-time arrival. Correlations and inconsistencies between these measures were observed on a case-by-case basis in past studies, without a full explanation or examination of the fundamental causes of such differing relationships. This paper analytically examines a number of reliability measures and explores their mathematical relationships and interdependencies. With the assumption of lognormal distributed travel times and the use of percent point function, a subset of reliability measures is expressed in relation to the shape parameter or the scale parameter of the lognormal distribution or to both. This process enables a clear understanding of the quantitative relationships and variation tendencies of different measures. Contrary to some previous studies and recommendations, this paper finds that the coefficient of variation, instead of the standard deviation, is a good proxy for several other reliability measures. The use of the average-based buffer index or average-based failure rate is not always appropriate, especially when travel time distributions are heavily skewed, in which case the median-based buffer index or failure rate is recommended. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Pu, Wenjing AD - Department of Transportation Planning, Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, 777 North Capitol Street, NE, Suite 300, Washington, DC 20002 wpu@mwcog.org Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 SP - 122 EP - 130 PB - Transportation Research Board VL - 1 IS - 2254 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Environmental Engineering Abstracts (EN); CSA / ASCE Civil Engineering Abstracts (CE) KW - Transportation engineering KW - Coefficient of variation KW - Transportation KW - Statistics KW - Standard deviation KW - Failure rates KW - Buffers KW - Mathematical analysis UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1022847817?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aenvironmentalengabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.atitle=Analytic+Relationships+Between+Travel+Time+Reliability+Measures&rft.au=Pu%2C+Wenjing&rft.aulast=Pu&rft.aufirst=Wenjing&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=1&rft.issue=2254&rft.spage=122&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2254-13 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-07-01 N1 - Number of references - 24 N1 - Last updated - 2013-08-06 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2254-13 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Improving Resilience of Critical Infrastructure Systems Postdisaster Recovery and Mitigation AN - 1019642076; 16416658 AB - The nation's capacity for maintenance and improvement of infrastructure systems and its ability to maintain and improve infrastructure systems and ensure the continued service of critical infrastructure systems are receiving special attention because recent disasters have had a significant impact on critical infrastructure. These critical infrastructure systems are the foundation of the nation's economic and social systems. Much research and many policy studies have been conducted to develop methods to improve protection of critical infrastructure with a focus on decreased vulnerability. This paper describes the development of a framework for a decision support system. The objective of the decision support system is to reduce the vulnerability of places and infrastructure systems through the use of mitigation strategies that increase system resilience and resistance to the stresses imposed by disasters. The decision support system will also provide an understanding of the many variables involved in developing strategies to improve the resilience of critical infrastructure systems. This decision support system, referred to as the Critical Infrastructure Resilience Decision Support System (CIR-DSS), uses systems dynamics and recognizes the impacts of disasters, including damage and disruption to critical infrastructure. Results include those of risk and cost-benefit analyses of alternative strategies that also recognize U.S. government policies for recovery and mitigation. A case study focused on transportation infrastructure was used to test and validate the CIR-DSS framework. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Croope, Silvana V AU - McNeil, Sue AD - Department of Transportation, 169 Brick Store Landing Road, Smyrna, DE 19977 croope@udel.edu Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 SP - 3 EP - 13 PB - Transportation Research Board IS - 2234 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Environmental Engineering Abstracts (EN); CSA / ASCE Civil Engineering Abstracts (CE) KW - Decision support systems KW - Disasters KW - Infrastructure KW - Policies KW - Recognition KW - Resilience KW - Strategy KW - Transportation UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1019642076?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aenvironmentalengabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.atitle=Improving+Resilience+of+Critical+Infrastructure+Systems+Postdisaster+Recovery+and+Mitigation&rft.au=Croope%2C+Silvana+V%3BMcNeil%2C+Sue&rft.aulast=Croope&rft.aufirst=Silvana&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=2234&rft.spage=3&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2234-01 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-06-01 N1 - Number of references - 34 N1 - Last updated - 2013-05-09 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2234-01 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Role of Potassium Acetate Deicer in Accelerating Alkali-Silica Reaction in Concrete Pavements AN - 1019641974; 16415805 AB - About 15 years after the introduction of alkali-acetate and alkali-formate deicers, premature deterioration was observed on some airfield pavements that had been exposed to the deicers. A characteristic map cracking pattern was observed on pavement surfaces that had experienced repeated applications of these deicers, and the suspected cause of this cracking pattern was accelerated alkali-silica reaction (ASR). Laboratory-based research indicated that alkali-silica reactive aggregates may undergo active deterioration when intimately exposed to such deicers under conditions promoting accelerated reaction. Investigations were conducted on cores collected from an airport whose deicing operations involved repeated applications of potassium acetate deicer. Detailed microscopic investigation indicated that uniform distress existed throughout the depth of the pavement, although in one, the distress resulted from alkali-carbonate reaction rather than from ASR. However, investigations on the depth of penetration of deicer into these pavement cores showed only limited incursion. A companion laboratory study estimated the extent of deicer penetration under different laboratory exposure conditions. Even in a relatively aggressive wetting and drying exposure regime, ingress of the deicer was limited. Thus, it was concluded that although the potassium acetate deicer can induce severe ASR under aggressive laboratory conditions, penetration into field airport pavements may be so limited in some cases that the potassium acetate deicer does not seem to aggravate the ASR distress should one already exist. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Balachandran, Chandni AU - Olek, Jan AU - Rangaraju, P R AU - Diamond, Sidney AD - SES Group & Associates LLC, 614 Biddle Street, Chesapeake City, MD 21915 chandni.balachandran.CTR@dot.gov Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 SP - 70 EP - 79 PB - Transportation Research Board IS - 2240 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Ceramic Abstracts/World Ceramics Abstracts (WC); Environmental Engineering Abstracts (EN); CSA / ASCE Civil Engineering Abstracts (CE) KW - Acetates KW - Alkali-silica reactions KW - Deicers KW - Deterioration KW - Fracture mechanics KW - Pavements KW - Penetration KW - Potassium UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1019641974?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aenvironmentalengabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.atitle=Role+of+Potassium+Acetate+Deicer+in+Accelerating+Alkali-Silica+Reaction+in+Concrete+Pavements&rft.au=Balachandran%2C+Chandni%3BOlek%2C+Jan%3BRangaraju%2C+P+R%3BDiamond%2C+Sidney&rft.aulast=Balachandran&rft.aufirst=Chandni&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=2240&rft.spage=70&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2240-10 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-06-01 N1 - Number of references - 17 N1 - Last updated - 2013-05-09 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2240-10 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Estimation of Lane-Level Travel Times in Vehicle-to-Vehicle and Vehicle-to-infrastructure-Based Traffic Information System AN - 1019641927; 16415826 AB - The recent advancement of vehicle positioning and wireless communication technologies facilitates the development of more sophisticated traffic control and information strategies. This study proposes a methodology for estimating lane-level travel times (L(2)TT) under an environment referred to as V2X, which includes vehicle-to-vehicle and vehicle-to-infrastructure communications. A framework is presented for a V2X-based traffic information system that is capable of transmitting vehicle positions and speeds, which are used as inputs of the proposed methodology. A concept of establishing temporal nodes and links based on the dynamic change in traffic conditions is proposed to estimate more reliable and accurate L(2)TT. VISSIM, a microscopic traffic simulator for multimodal traffic flow modeling, is used to evaluate the proposed travel time estimation method. Statistical analysis techniques including analysis of variance and a homogeneity test between data groups are adopted to derive more generalized conclusions. The evaluation results show that less than a 10% mean absolute percentage error was achievable with a 20% probe vehicle rate. It is expected that the proposed methodology will serve as a useful precursor to the development of a next-generation traffic information system in the robust wireless communications era. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Rim, Heesub AU - Oh, Cheol AU - Kang, Kyungpyo AU - Kim, Seongho AD - Department of Transportation Systems Engineering, Hanyang University at Ansan, 1271, Sa-3 Dong, Sangnokgu, Ansan-Si, Kyunggi-Do, 426-791, South Korea Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 SP - 9 EP - 16 PB - Transportation Research Board IS - 2243 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Environmental Engineering Abstracts (EN); CSA / ASCE Civil Engineering Abstracts (CE) KW - Dynamics KW - Estimating KW - Methodology KW - Traffic engineering KW - Traffic flow KW - Traffic information KW - Vehicles KW - Wireless communication UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1019641927?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aenvironmentalengabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.atitle=Estimation+of+Lane-Level+Travel+Times+in+Vehicle-to-Vehicle+and+Vehicle-to-infrastructure-Based+Traffic+Information+System&rft.au=Rim%2C+Heesub%3BOh%2C+Cheol%3BKang%2C+Kyungpyo%3BKim%2C+Seongho&rft.aulast=Rim&rft.aufirst=Heesub&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=2243&rft.spage=9&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2243-02 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-06-01 N1 - Number of references - 13 N1 - Last updated - 2013-05-09 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2243-02 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Evaluation of Spatial and Temporal Speed Limit Compliance in Highway Work Zones AN - 1019640905; 16415021 AB - Typically, speed limits are reduced in work zones to safely accommodate construction activities and motorists on the roadway. This paper presents a methodology to evaluate the temporal and spatial effects of techniques designed to encourage compliance with work zone speed limits. The evaluations were performed over short and long segments within and adjacent to an Interstate construction work zone in suburban Indianapolis, Indiana, with the use of vehicle probe data. Space mean speed was measured by using 13 Bluetooth probe data acquisition stations, which provided a random sample of unique identifiers for approximately 11% of the passing vehicles. These space mean speed data were used to compute a series of comparisons between a day with no enforcement activity and a day with exceptionally high enforcement. During enforcement, the space mean speed decreased by approximately 5 mph throughout the 12.2-mi study segment. Within 30 min after the enforcement detail ended, however, space mean speeds increased, and there was no statistically significant residual impact on the space mean speed. Even at the absolute peak of enforcement, 75% of the probe vehicles exceeded the speed limit in all but one of the segments that had a posted speed limit of 45 mph. In addition, 25% of the probe vehicles exceeded the posted limit by more than 5 mph in all 45-mph segments during peak enforcement. The study is perhaps the largest ever conducted with respect to concurrent enforcement and extensive space mean measurement The data represent an upper bound on the impact of enforcement activity on work zone speeds and should be of interest to public agencies as they consider compliance techniques. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Wasson, Jason S AU - Boruff, Guy W AU - Hainen, Alexander M AU - Remias, Stephen M AU - Hulme, Eric A AU - Famsworth, Grant D AU - Bullock, Darcy M AD - Indiana Department of Transportation, P O Box 2279, West Lafayette, IN 479Q6 jwasson@indot.in.gov Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 SP - 1 EP - 15 PB - Transportation Research Board IS - 2258 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Environmental Engineering Abstracts (EN); CSA / ASCE Civil Engineering Abstracts (CE) KW - Construction KW - Segments KW - Space probes KW - Speed limits KW - Stations KW - Temporal logic KW - Transportation KW - Vehicles UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1019640905?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aenvironmentalengabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.atitle=Evaluation+of+Spatial+and+Temporal+Speed+Limit+Compliance+in+Highway+Work+Zones&rft.au=Wasson%2C+Jason+S%3BBoruff%2C+Guy+W%3BHainen%2C+Alexander+M%3BRemias%2C+Stephen+M%3BHulme%2C+Eric+A%3BFamsworth%2C+Grant+D%3BBullock%2C+Darcy+M&rft.aulast=Wasson&rft.aufirst=Jason&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=2258&rft.spage=1&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2258-01 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-06-01 N1 - Number of references - 23 N1 - Last updated - 2013-05-09 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2258-01 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Ride Specifications Virginia's Experience, Accomplishments, and Challenges AN - 1019639291; 16414994 AB - Road roughness is a major factor in pavement condition because of its effects on pavement resurfacing and vehicle operating costs. Rougher pavements require more frequent resurfacing, generate complaints from highway users, reduce optimum travel speeds, disrupt traffic flow, and create safety hazards. Ride specification is one of the tools practiced by almost all state agencies including the Virginia Department of Transportation (DOT) to achieve the desired smoothness on the road. A ride specification dictates the level of smoothness from paving projects and can adjust the contractor's payment, depending on the finished ride. Virginia DOT's experience, accomplishments, and challenges with ride specifications are presented. Through application of the ride specification during the past decade, the ride quality on Virginia's rideability project roads has continued to improve. The average roughness after paving has improved dramatically in the past few years compared with that of the early 2000s. Between 2005 and 2009,3,068 lane miles were paved according to the ride specification and a net bonus of $4,928,422 was paid to contractors. The benefit of having smoother roads could result in direct savings to an agency from deferring resurfacing activities by about 2 years and substantial savings in terms of fuel efficiency (especially for the trucks), reduced congestion due to deferred resurfacing, reduced vehicle maintenance costs (from smoother roads), and other benefits. The estimated benefits from applying the ride specification during 2005 to 2009 are found to far outweigh the cost. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Nair, Harikrishnan AU - Habib, Affan AU - Saha, Bipad AU - Nelson, Sean AD - Virginia Department of Transportation, 1401 East Broad Street, Richmond, VA 23219 Harikrishnan.nair@vdot.virginia.gov Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 SP - 189 EP - 196 PB - Transportation Research Board IS - 2227 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Environmental Engineering Abstracts (EN); CSA / ASCE Civil Engineering Abstracts (CE) KW - Pavements KW - Paving KW - Resurfacing KW - Roads KW - Roughness KW - Specifications KW - Surfacing KW - Trucks UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1019639291?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aenvironmentalengabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.atitle=Ride+Specifications+Virginia%27s+Experience%2C+Accomplishments%2C+and+Challenges&rft.au=Nair%2C+Harikrishnan%3BHabib%2C+Affan%3BSaha%2C+Bipad%3BNelson%2C+Sean&rft.aulast=Nair&rft.aufirst=Harikrishnan&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=2227&rft.spage=189&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2227-21 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-06-01 N1 - Number of references - 12 N1 - Last updated - 2013-05-09 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2227-21 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Accelerated Pavement Testing and Gradation-Based Performance Evaluation Method AN - 1019638226; 16414955 AB - Particle size distribution is a critical property that greatly influences an asphalt mixture's resistance to permanent deformation and cracking as well as a mixture's workability, permeability, and durability. The Superpave? mix design method attempts to address some of these issues by requiring that an aggregate gradation pass within control points. The control points concern: (a) the top size of the aggregate, (b) the relative proportion of coarse and fine aggregate, and (c) the dust proportion. Little additional guidance is given about suitable aggregate gradations. Some blends may pass the required Superpave criteria but perform poorly. A new theoretical approach for evaluation and specification of aggregate gradations was recently developed in Florida. The approach provides a framework to ensure that the resulting mixtures will have sufficient aggregate interlock to resist permanent deformation. Therefore, this method might be used at the mix design phase to assess the field performance of an asphalt mixture on the basis of aggregate gradation. A study was conducted to assess the appropriateness of, and to validate, this proposed approach through use of a controlled accelerated pavement testing experiment. The aggregate-based performance evaluation method is described, as are the subsequent experimental validation efforts and findings of the accelerated pavement testing. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Greene, James AU - Kim, Sungho AU - Choubane, Bouzid AD - Florida Department of Transportation, Materials Research Park greene@dot.state.fl.us Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 SP - 119 EP - 127 PB - Transportation Research Board VL - 1 IS - 2225 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Environmental Engineering Abstracts (EN); CSA / ASCE Civil Engineering Abstracts (CE) KW - Accelerated tests KW - Aggregates KW - Asphalt KW - Blends KW - Coarsening KW - Deformation KW - Pavements KW - Performance evaluation UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1019638226?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aenvironmentalengabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.atitle=Accelerated+Pavement+Testing+and+Gradation-Based+Performance+Evaluation+Method&rft.au=Greene%2C+James%3BKim%2C+Sungho%3BChoubane%2C+Bouzid&rft.aulast=Greene&rft.aufirst=James&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=1&rft.issue=2225&rft.spage=119&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2225-13 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-06-01 N1 - Number of references - 10 N1 - Last updated - 2013-05-09 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2225-13 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Thinking Outside the Box to Expand Metropolitan Travel Choices AN - 1019629145; 16330431 AB - The multimodal expressway system is a concept of introducing travel choices for suburban commuters in major metropolitan areas relatively quickly and inexpensively. The entire existing limited-access highway system would provide for free flow of carpool vehicles and buses by temporarily slowing (or stopping) and releasing excess traffic at freeway entrance ramps and on the freeway main line at a series of concentric cordon locations around the core of the metropolitan area. At these locations, travel lanes would be created on the shoulder and restricted to use by buses and high-occupancy vehicles with three or more persons and would allow them to bypass the slower moving metered general-purpose traffic. A multicentered bus rapid transit system would serve commute trips between suburban residential areas and major employment centers. The transit system would be supplemented with a flexible carpooling system. An enhanced version of the concept would introduce variable peak period tolls to encourage further mode shifts, reduce traffic demand, and help pay for system costs. Sketch planning estimates of costs for freeway, transit, and flexible carpooling investments suggested that the capital costs could be self-financed through road-pricing revenues. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - DeCorla-Souza, Patrick AU - Berman, Wayne AU - Halkias, John AD - Federal Highway Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590 patrick.decorla-souza@dot.gov Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 SP - 111 EP - 118 PB - Transportation Research Board VL - 2217 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Environmental Engineering Abstracts (EN); CSA / ASCE Civil Engineering Abstracts (CE) KW - Buses (vehicles) KW - Costs KW - Freeways KW - Metropolitan areas KW - Peak periods KW - Traffic engineering KW - Traffic flow KW - Transit UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1019629145?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aenvironmentalengabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.atitle=Thinking+Outside+the+Box+to+Expand+Metropolitan+Travel+Choices&rft.au=DeCorla-Souza%2C+Patrick%3BBerman%2C+Wayne%3BHalkias%2C+John&rft.aulast=DeCorla-Souza&rft.aufirst=Patrick&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=2217&rft.issue=&rft.spage=111&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2217-14 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-06-01 N1 - Number of references - 26 N1 - Last updated - 2013-05-09 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2217-14 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Oxidative Aging of Asphalt Binders in Hot-Mix Asphalt Mixtures AN - 1009824367; 16175412 AB - This study evaluated the effect of different aggregate sources along with their corresponding change in mixture characteristics to determine the influence of both on binder oxidation rates and changes in mixture stiffness when compacted mixtures were exposed to laboratory aging conditions. The two aggregate sources, Colorado and Nevada, had different gradations and different water absorption rates, which led to differences in the calculated asphalt binder apparent film thicknesses (AFT) for each mixture. Two asphalt binders, an unmodified PG 64-22 and a styrene-butadiene-styrene-modified PG 64-28, were used. The overall findings of the study indicated that both the aggregate and mixture characteristics influenced the oxidation rates of the binder, with the two binders oxidizing by similar amounts when aged in mixtures with the same characteristics (AFT and mixture air voids). The oxidation changes in the binder had differing effects on the stiffness of the mixture as a function of age. Not only were the aggregate and mixture characteristics important to the mixture stiffness and aging relationship, but the binder characteristics themselves, in particular polymer modification, influenced the aging and stiffness relationships of mixtures with age. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Morian, Nathan AU - Hajj, Elie Y AU - Glover, Charles J AU - Sebaaly, Peter E AD - Nevada Department of Transportation, Carson City, NV 89712 Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 SP - 107 EP - 116 PB - Transportation Research Board VL - 1 IS - 2207 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Environmental Engineering Abstracts (EN); CSA / ASCE Civil Engineering Abstracts (CE) KW - Age KW - Aggregates KW - Asphalt KW - Binders KW - Film thickness KW - Oxidation KW - Oxidation rate KW - Stiffness UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1009824367?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aenvironmentalengabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.atitle=Oxidative+Aging+of+Asphalt+Binders+in+Hot-Mix+Asphalt+Mixtures&rft.au=Morian%2C+Nathan%3BHajj%2C+Elie+Y%3BGlover%2C+Charles+J%3BSebaaly%2C+Peter+E&rft.aulast=Morian&rft.aufirst=Nathan&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=1&rft.issue=2207&rft.spage=107&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2207-14 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-05-01 N1 - Last updated - 2013-05-09 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2207-14 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Effect of PG XX-34 on Transverse Cracking in Minnesota AN - 1009824345; 16175406 AB - The Minnesota Department of Transportation (DOT) adopted the use of performance-graded (PG) asphalt binders in 1997. In 1999 the Minnesota DOT required PG XX-34 binders for all new (not overlay) bituminous construction with the objective of reducing the amount of transverse cracking. Pavement management data were used to track the development of transverse cracking on PG XX-34 projects. The transverse cracking rate of the PG XX-34 projects was then compared with the cracking rates for similar projects from the pre-PG era. The comparison found that after 7 years of service, transverse cracks on the PG projects were developing at approximately 1/10th the rate experienced before performance grading was implemented. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Lukanen, Erland AD - Office of Materials and Road Research, Minnesota Department of Transportation, 1400 Gervais Avenue, Maplewood, MN 55109 erland.Iukanen@state.mn.us Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 SP - 58 EP - 61 PB - Transportation Research Board VL - 1 IS - 2207 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Environmental Engineering Abstracts (EN); CSA / ASCE Civil Engineering Abstracts (CE) KW - Asphalt KW - Binders KW - Bituminous KW - Construction KW - Cracks KW - Fracture mechanics KW - Management KW - Transportation UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1009824345?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aenvironmentalengabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.atitle=Effect+of+PG+XX-34+on+Transverse+Cracking+in+Minnesota&rft.au=Lukanen%2C+Erland&rft.aulast=Lukanen&rft.aufirst=Erland&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=1&rft.issue=2207&rft.spage=58&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2207-08 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-05-01 N1 - Last updated - 2013-05-09 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2207-08 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Fatigue Response in Bridge Deck Connection Composed of Field-Cast Ultra-High-Performance Concrete AN - 1008826200; 16436867 AB - The use of prefabricated concrete bridge deck components can offer many advantages over conventional cast-in-place construction techniques. However, completing the overall bridge system requires the installation of connecting elements. The state of the practice for these connecting elements has been deficient in resilience, durability, and ease of construction. An ongoing research effort at FHWA, in conjunction with partners from the New York State and Iowa Departments of Transportation, is focused on engaging the advantageous properties of ultra-high-performance concrete (UHPC) to develop a new type of detail applicable to deck-level connections between prefabricated modular bridge components. This physical testing program investigated the structural performance of a field-cast UHPC connection under repeated truck wheel loading. The connection-150 mm (5.9 in.) thick and 152 mm (6 in.) wide-was designed as a noncontact lap splice with straight 16M (No. 5) steel reinforcement. After more than 11 million structural-loading cycles at progressively increasing load levels, individual bars within the connection began to fail in metal fatigue. The stress range in the reinforcement at initial fatigue failure was conservatively estimated at 197 MPa (28.6 ksi). No debonding or slippage of reinforcement was observed. The performance of this connection detail demonstrated the types of details that can be developed and deployed with field-cast UHPC. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Graybeal, Benjamin A AD - Federal Highway Administration, U S Department of Transportation, 6300 Georgetown Pike, McLean, VA 22101, benjamin.graybeal@dot.gov Y1 - 2011 PY - 2011 DA - 2011 SP - 93 EP - 100 PB - Transportation Research Board IS - 2251 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Health & Safety Science Abstracts KW - Metals KW - Bridges KW - Transportation KW - USA, Iowa KW - Stress KW - Trucks KW - Steel KW - Concrete KW - fatigue KW - USA, New York KW - H 2000:Transportation UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1008826200?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ahealthsafetyabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.atitle=Fatigue+Response+in+Bridge+Deck+Connection+Composed+of+Field-Cast+Ultra-High-Performance+Concrete&rft.au=Graybeal%2C+Benjamin+A&rft.aulast=Graybeal&rft.aufirst=Benjamin&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=2251&rft.spage=93&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2251-10 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-04-01 N1 - Number of references - 5 N1 - Last updated - 2015-03-19 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Metals; Transportation; Bridges; Stress; Trucks; Steel; Concrete; fatigue; USA, Iowa; USA, New York DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2251-10 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. [Part 31 of 31] T2 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. AN - 873127626; 14753-3_0031 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements to existing portions of US 50/63 (Rex Whitton Expressway) and the local street network in Cole County, Missouri are proposed. The Whitton Expressway is located in central Jefferson City near the downtown business district, the Missouri State Penitentiary (MSP) redevelopment site, the Old Munichberg and Central East Side neighborhoods, and the campus of Lincoln University. Transitions in roadway types from freeway to urban arterial and back to freeway lead to unsatisfactory levels of service and associated traffic congestion, especially during peak periods. The Whitton Expressway portion of the study corridor extends three miles and is bounded on the west by Bolivar Street, just east of the Tri-level interchange, and on the east by the Eastland Drive interchange. The area from 300 feet south of the Whitton Expressway north to McCarty Street is included. Access to the MSP site from portions of downtown and the Central East Side between McCarty Street and the prison is also being examined. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to historic properties, neighborhood cohesion, pedestrian access, and accessibility to businesses and institutions. In addition to a No Build Alternative, three mainline Whitton Expressway concepts and three prison access concepts are considered as reasonable alternatives in this final EIS. Under Alternative 4, an elevated viaduct starting just east of Broadway and returning to grade near the Jackson overpass would be constructed. Alternative 5 would involve construction of a parkway with a wide median and additional travel lanes; an optional elevated structure would carry through traffic separate from local traffic if deemed necessary. Under Alternative 6, a north-south overpass at Madison Street would be constructed and improvements would be made at Jefferson and Monroe. Under Alternative A, a new half-diamond interchange on Whitton Expressway at Lafayette Street would be constructed and Lafayette would be widened to four or five lanes. Alternative D would utilize a new half-diamond interchange at Lafayette and realign Clark Avenue. Alternative G is a slight permutation of Alternative D and would involve construction of a full diamond interchange at Lafayette. The preferred alternative is a combination of Alternative 6, the Madison Street overpass option, and Alternative G, a new full diamond interchange at Lafayette Street and a realigned Clark Avenue. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve roadway capacity, traffic operations, and traffic safety. Structural engineering would reduce the opportunities for head-on crashes and add room for recovery or avoidance of obstacles. Access to MSP, Lincoln University, and Jefferson City High School would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Full build-out of the preferred alternative would: directly affect historic resources such as the Craftsman/Monastery district and the property of the Lincoln University President's House; acquire the Quinn Chapel AME church; alter access to several downtown businesses; fully acquire 25 residences and four business properties; and partially acquire 16 residences and four business properties. Right-of-way acquisition and construction would impact a minority population and take an historic district associated with the African American Foot neighborhood. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0138D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100483, draft EIS--180 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, December 29, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 31 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-09-03-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Prisons KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127626?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.title=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 29, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. [Part 30 of 31] T2 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. AN - 873127620; 14753-3_0030 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements to existing portions of US 50/63 (Rex Whitton Expressway) and the local street network in Cole County, Missouri are proposed. The Whitton Expressway is located in central Jefferson City near the downtown business district, the Missouri State Penitentiary (MSP) redevelopment site, the Old Munichberg and Central East Side neighborhoods, and the campus of Lincoln University. Transitions in roadway types from freeway to urban arterial and back to freeway lead to unsatisfactory levels of service and associated traffic congestion, especially during peak periods. The Whitton Expressway portion of the study corridor extends three miles and is bounded on the west by Bolivar Street, just east of the Tri-level interchange, and on the east by the Eastland Drive interchange. The area from 300 feet south of the Whitton Expressway north to McCarty Street is included. Access to the MSP site from portions of downtown and the Central East Side between McCarty Street and the prison is also being examined. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to historic properties, neighborhood cohesion, pedestrian access, and accessibility to businesses and institutions. In addition to a No Build Alternative, three mainline Whitton Expressway concepts and three prison access concepts are considered as reasonable alternatives in this final EIS. Under Alternative 4, an elevated viaduct starting just east of Broadway and returning to grade near the Jackson overpass would be constructed. Alternative 5 would involve construction of a parkway with a wide median and additional travel lanes; an optional elevated structure would carry through traffic separate from local traffic if deemed necessary. Under Alternative 6, a north-south overpass at Madison Street would be constructed and improvements would be made at Jefferson and Monroe. Under Alternative A, a new half-diamond interchange on Whitton Expressway at Lafayette Street would be constructed and Lafayette would be widened to four or five lanes. Alternative D would utilize a new half-diamond interchange at Lafayette and realign Clark Avenue. Alternative G is a slight permutation of Alternative D and would involve construction of a full diamond interchange at Lafayette. The preferred alternative is a combination of Alternative 6, the Madison Street overpass option, and Alternative G, a new full diamond interchange at Lafayette Street and a realigned Clark Avenue. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve roadway capacity, traffic operations, and traffic safety. Structural engineering would reduce the opportunities for head-on crashes and add room for recovery or avoidance of obstacles. Access to MSP, Lincoln University, and Jefferson City High School would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Full build-out of the preferred alternative would: directly affect historic resources such as the Craftsman/Monastery district and the property of the Lincoln University President's House; acquire the Quinn Chapel AME church; alter access to several downtown businesses; fully acquire 25 residences and four business properties; and partially acquire 16 residences and four business properties. Right-of-way acquisition and construction would impact a minority population and take an historic district associated with the African American Foot neighborhood. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0138D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100483, draft EIS--180 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, December 29, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 30 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-09-03-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Prisons KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127620?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.title=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 29, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. [Part 29 of 31] T2 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. AN - 873127613; 14753-3_0029 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements to existing portions of US 50/63 (Rex Whitton Expressway) and the local street network in Cole County, Missouri are proposed. The Whitton Expressway is located in central Jefferson City near the downtown business district, the Missouri State Penitentiary (MSP) redevelopment site, the Old Munichberg and Central East Side neighborhoods, and the campus of Lincoln University. Transitions in roadway types from freeway to urban arterial and back to freeway lead to unsatisfactory levels of service and associated traffic congestion, especially during peak periods. The Whitton Expressway portion of the study corridor extends three miles and is bounded on the west by Bolivar Street, just east of the Tri-level interchange, and on the east by the Eastland Drive interchange. The area from 300 feet south of the Whitton Expressway north to McCarty Street is included. Access to the MSP site from portions of downtown and the Central East Side between McCarty Street and the prison is also being examined. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to historic properties, neighborhood cohesion, pedestrian access, and accessibility to businesses and institutions. In addition to a No Build Alternative, three mainline Whitton Expressway concepts and three prison access concepts are considered as reasonable alternatives in this final EIS. Under Alternative 4, an elevated viaduct starting just east of Broadway and returning to grade near the Jackson overpass would be constructed. Alternative 5 would involve construction of a parkway with a wide median and additional travel lanes; an optional elevated structure would carry through traffic separate from local traffic if deemed necessary. Under Alternative 6, a north-south overpass at Madison Street would be constructed and improvements would be made at Jefferson and Monroe. Under Alternative A, a new half-diamond interchange on Whitton Expressway at Lafayette Street would be constructed and Lafayette would be widened to four or five lanes. Alternative D would utilize a new half-diamond interchange at Lafayette and realign Clark Avenue. Alternative G is a slight permutation of Alternative D and would involve construction of a full diamond interchange at Lafayette. The preferred alternative is a combination of Alternative 6, the Madison Street overpass option, and Alternative G, a new full diamond interchange at Lafayette Street and a realigned Clark Avenue. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve roadway capacity, traffic operations, and traffic safety. Structural engineering would reduce the opportunities for head-on crashes and add room for recovery or avoidance of obstacles. Access to MSP, Lincoln University, and Jefferson City High School would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Full build-out of the preferred alternative would: directly affect historic resources such as the Craftsman/Monastery district and the property of the Lincoln University President's House; acquire the Quinn Chapel AME church; alter access to several downtown businesses; fully acquire 25 residences and four business properties; and partially acquire 16 residences and four business properties. Right-of-way acquisition and construction would impact a minority population and take an historic district associated with the African American Foot neighborhood. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0138D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100483, draft EIS--180 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, December 29, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 29 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-09-03-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Prisons KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127613?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.title=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 29, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. [Part 28 of 31] T2 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. AN - 873127607; 14753-3_0028 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements to existing portions of US 50/63 (Rex Whitton Expressway) and the local street network in Cole County, Missouri are proposed. The Whitton Expressway is located in central Jefferson City near the downtown business district, the Missouri State Penitentiary (MSP) redevelopment site, the Old Munichberg and Central East Side neighborhoods, and the campus of Lincoln University. Transitions in roadway types from freeway to urban arterial and back to freeway lead to unsatisfactory levels of service and associated traffic congestion, especially during peak periods. The Whitton Expressway portion of the study corridor extends three miles and is bounded on the west by Bolivar Street, just east of the Tri-level interchange, and on the east by the Eastland Drive interchange. The area from 300 feet south of the Whitton Expressway north to McCarty Street is included. Access to the MSP site from portions of downtown and the Central East Side between McCarty Street and the prison is also being examined. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to historic properties, neighborhood cohesion, pedestrian access, and accessibility to businesses and institutions. In addition to a No Build Alternative, three mainline Whitton Expressway concepts and three prison access concepts are considered as reasonable alternatives in this final EIS. Under Alternative 4, an elevated viaduct starting just east of Broadway and returning to grade near the Jackson overpass would be constructed. Alternative 5 would involve construction of a parkway with a wide median and additional travel lanes; an optional elevated structure would carry through traffic separate from local traffic if deemed necessary. Under Alternative 6, a north-south overpass at Madison Street would be constructed and improvements would be made at Jefferson and Monroe. Under Alternative A, a new half-diamond interchange on Whitton Expressway at Lafayette Street would be constructed and Lafayette would be widened to four or five lanes. Alternative D would utilize a new half-diamond interchange at Lafayette and realign Clark Avenue. Alternative G is a slight permutation of Alternative D and would involve construction of a full diamond interchange at Lafayette. The preferred alternative is a combination of Alternative 6, the Madison Street overpass option, and Alternative G, a new full diamond interchange at Lafayette Street and a realigned Clark Avenue. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve roadway capacity, traffic operations, and traffic safety. Structural engineering would reduce the opportunities for head-on crashes and add room for recovery or avoidance of obstacles. Access to MSP, Lincoln University, and Jefferson City High School would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Full build-out of the preferred alternative would: directly affect historic resources such as the Craftsman/Monastery district and the property of the Lincoln University President's House; acquire the Quinn Chapel AME church; alter access to several downtown businesses; fully acquire 25 residences and four business properties; and partially acquire 16 residences and four business properties. Right-of-way acquisition and construction would impact a minority population and take an historic district associated with the African American Foot neighborhood. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0138D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100483, draft EIS--180 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, December 29, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 28 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-09-03-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Prisons KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127607?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.title=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 29, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. [Part 16 of 31] T2 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. AN - 873127567; 14753-3_0016 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements to existing portions of US 50/63 (Rex Whitton Expressway) and the local street network in Cole County, Missouri are proposed. The Whitton Expressway is located in central Jefferson City near the downtown business district, the Missouri State Penitentiary (MSP) redevelopment site, the Old Munichberg and Central East Side neighborhoods, and the campus of Lincoln University. Transitions in roadway types from freeway to urban arterial and back to freeway lead to unsatisfactory levels of service and associated traffic congestion, especially during peak periods. The Whitton Expressway portion of the study corridor extends three miles and is bounded on the west by Bolivar Street, just east of the Tri-level interchange, and on the east by the Eastland Drive interchange. The area from 300 feet south of the Whitton Expressway north to McCarty Street is included. Access to the MSP site from portions of downtown and the Central East Side between McCarty Street and the prison is also being examined. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to historic properties, neighborhood cohesion, pedestrian access, and accessibility to businesses and institutions. In addition to a No Build Alternative, three mainline Whitton Expressway concepts and three prison access concepts are considered as reasonable alternatives in this final EIS. Under Alternative 4, an elevated viaduct starting just east of Broadway and returning to grade near the Jackson overpass would be constructed. Alternative 5 would involve construction of a parkway with a wide median and additional travel lanes; an optional elevated structure would carry through traffic separate from local traffic if deemed necessary. Under Alternative 6, a north-south overpass at Madison Street would be constructed and improvements would be made at Jefferson and Monroe. Under Alternative A, a new half-diamond interchange on Whitton Expressway at Lafayette Street would be constructed and Lafayette would be widened to four or five lanes. Alternative D would utilize a new half-diamond interchange at Lafayette and realign Clark Avenue. Alternative G is a slight permutation of Alternative D and would involve construction of a full diamond interchange at Lafayette. The preferred alternative is a combination of Alternative 6, the Madison Street overpass option, and Alternative G, a new full diamond interchange at Lafayette Street and a realigned Clark Avenue. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve roadway capacity, traffic operations, and traffic safety. Structural engineering would reduce the opportunities for head-on crashes and add room for recovery or avoidance of obstacles. Access to MSP, Lincoln University, and Jefferson City High School would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Full build-out of the preferred alternative would: directly affect historic resources such as the Craftsman/Monastery district and the property of the Lincoln University President's House; acquire the Quinn Chapel AME church; alter access to several downtown businesses; fully acquire 25 residences and four business properties; and partially acquire 16 residences and four business properties. Right-of-way acquisition and construction would impact a minority population and take an historic district associated with the African American Foot neighborhood. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0138D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100483, draft EIS--180 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, December 29, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 16 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-09-03-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Prisons KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127567?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.title=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 29, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. [Part 15 of 31] T2 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. AN - 873127562; 14753-3_0015 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements to existing portions of US 50/63 (Rex Whitton Expressway) and the local street network in Cole County, Missouri are proposed. The Whitton Expressway is located in central Jefferson City near the downtown business district, the Missouri State Penitentiary (MSP) redevelopment site, the Old Munichberg and Central East Side neighborhoods, and the campus of Lincoln University. Transitions in roadway types from freeway to urban arterial and back to freeway lead to unsatisfactory levels of service and associated traffic congestion, especially during peak periods. The Whitton Expressway portion of the study corridor extends three miles and is bounded on the west by Bolivar Street, just east of the Tri-level interchange, and on the east by the Eastland Drive interchange. The area from 300 feet south of the Whitton Expressway north to McCarty Street is included. Access to the MSP site from portions of downtown and the Central East Side between McCarty Street and the prison is also being examined. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to historic properties, neighborhood cohesion, pedestrian access, and accessibility to businesses and institutions. In addition to a No Build Alternative, three mainline Whitton Expressway concepts and three prison access concepts are considered as reasonable alternatives in this final EIS. Under Alternative 4, an elevated viaduct starting just east of Broadway and returning to grade near the Jackson overpass would be constructed. Alternative 5 would involve construction of a parkway with a wide median and additional travel lanes; an optional elevated structure would carry through traffic separate from local traffic if deemed necessary. Under Alternative 6, a north-south overpass at Madison Street would be constructed and improvements would be made at Jefferson and Monroe. Under Alternative A, a new half-diamond interchange on Whitton Expressway at Lafayette Street would be constructed and Lafayette would be widened to four or five lanes. Alternative D would utilize a new half-diamond interchange at Lafayette and realign Clark Avenue. Alternative G is a slight permutation of Alternative D and would involve construction of a full diamond interchange at Lafayette. The preferred alternative is a combination of Alternative 6, the Madison Street overpass option, and Alternative G, a new full diamond interchange at Lafayette Street and a realigned Clark Avenue. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve roadway capacity, traffic operations, and traffic safety. Structural engineering would reduce the opportunities for head-on crashes and add room for recovery or avoidance of obstacles. Access to MSP, Lincoln University, and Jefferson City High School would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Full build-out of the preferred alternative would: directly affect historic resources such as the Craftsman/Monastery district and the property of the Lincoln University President's House; acquire the Quinn Chapel AME church; alter access to several downtown businesses; fully acquire 25 residences and four business properties; and partially acquire 16 residences and four business properties. Right-of-way acquisition and construction would impact a minority population and take an historic district associated with the African American Foot neighborhood. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0138D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100483, draft EIS--180 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, December 29, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-09-03-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Prisons KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127562?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.title=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 29, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. [Part 14 of 31] T2 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. AN - 873127560; 14753-3_0014 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements to existing portions of US 50/63 (Rex Whitton Expressway) and the local street network in Cole County, Missouri are proposed. The Whitton Expressway is located in central Jefferson City near the downtown business district, the Missouri State Penitentiary (MSP) redevelopment site, the Old Munichberg and Central East Side neighborhoods, and the campus of Lincoln University. Transitions in roadway types from freeway to urban arterial and back to freeway lead to unsatisfactory levels of service and associated traffic congestion, especially during peak periods. The Whitton Expressway portion of the study corridor extends three miles and is bounded on the west by Bolivar Street, just east of the Tri-level interchange, and on the east by the Eastland Drive interchange. The area from 300 feet south of the Whitton Expressway north to McCarty Street is included. Access to the MSP site from portions of downtown and the Central East Side between McCarty Street and the prison is also being examined. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to historic properties, neighborhood cohesion, pedestrian access, and accessibility to businesses and institutions. In addition to a No Build Alternative, three mainline Whitton Expressway concepts and three prison access concepts are considered as reasonable alternatives in this final EIS. Under Alternative 4, an elevated viaduct starting just east of Broadway and returning to grade near the Jackson overpass would be constructed. Alternative 5 would involve construction of a parkway with a wide median and additional travel lanes; an optional elevated structure would carry through traffic separate from local traffic if deemed necessary. Under Alternative 6, a north-south overpass at Madison Street would be constructed and improvements would be made at Jefferson and Monroe. Under Alternative A, a new half-diamond interchange on Whitton Expressway at Lafayette Street would be constructed and Lafayette would be widened to four or five lanes. Alternative D would utilize a new half-diamond interchange at Lafayette and realign Clark Avenue. Alternative G is a slight permutation of Alternative D and would involve construction of a full diamond interchange at Lafayette. The preferred alternative is a combination of Alternative 6, the Madison Street overpass option, and Alternative G, a new full diamond interchange at Lafayette Street and a realigned Clark Avenue. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve roadway capacity, traffic operations, and traffic safety. Structural engineering would reduce the opportunities for head-on crashes and add room for recovery or avoidance of obstacles. Access to MSP, Lincoln University, and Jefferson City High School would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Full build-out of the preferred alternative would: directly affect historic resources such as the Craftsman/Monastery district and the property of the Lincoln University President's House; acquire the Quinn Chapel AME church; alter access to several downtown businesses; fully acquire 25 residences and four business properties; and partially acquire 16 residences and four business properties. Right-of-way acquisition and construction would impact a minority population and take an historic district associated with the African American Foot neighborhood. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0138D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100483, draft EIS--180 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, December 29, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-09-03-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Prisons KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127560?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.title=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 29, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. [Part 13 of 31] T2 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. AN - 873127555; 14753-3_0013 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements to existing portions of US 50/63 (Rex Whitton Expressway) and the local street network in Cole County, Missouri are proposed. The Whitton Expressway is located in central Jefferson City near the downtown business district, the Missouri State Penitentiary (MSP) redevelopment site, the Old Munichberg and Central East Side neighborhoods, and the campus of Lincoln University. Transitions in roadway types from freeway to urban arterial and back to freeway lead to unsatisfactory levels of service and associated traffic congestion, especially during peak periods. The Whitton Expressway portion of the study corridor extends three miles and is bounded on the west by Bolivar Street, just east of the Tri-level interchange, and on the east by the Eastland Drive interchange. The area from 300 feet south of the Whitton Expressway north to McCarty Street is included. Access to the MSP site from portions of downtown and the Central East Side between McCarty Street and the prison is also being examined. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to historic properties, neighborhood cohesion, pedestrian access, and accessibility to businesses and institutions. In addition to a No Build Alternative, three mainline Whitton Expressway concepts and three prison access concepts are considered as reasonable alternatives in this final EIS. Under Alternative 4, an elevated viaduct starting just east of Broadway and returning to grade near the Jackson overpass would be constructed. Alternative 5 would involve construction of a parkway with a wide median and additional travel lanes; an optional elevated structure would carry through traffic separate from local traffic if deemed necessary. Under Alternative 6, a north-south overpass at Madison Street would be constructed and improvements would be made at Jefferson and Monroe. Under Alternative A, a new half-diamond interchange on Whitton Expressway at Lafayette Street would be constructed and Lafayette would be widened to four or five lanes. Alternative D would utilize a new half-diamond interchange at Lafayette and realign Clark Avenue. Alternative G is a slight permutation of Alternative D and would involve construction of a full diamond interchange at Lafayette. The preferred alternative is a combination of Alternative 6, the Madison Street overpass option, and Alternative G, a new full diamond interchange at Lafayette Street and a realigned Clark Avenue. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve roadway capacity, traffic operations, and traffic safety. Structural engineering would reduce the opportunities for head-on crashes and add room for recovery or avoidance of obstacles. Access to MSP, Lincoln University, and Jefferson City High School would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Full build-out of the preferred alternative would: directly affect historic resources such as the Craftsman/Monastery district and the property of the Lincoln University President's House; acquire the Quinn Chapel AME church; alter access to several downtown businesses; fully acquire 25 residences and four business properties; and partially acquire 16 residences and four business properties. Right-of-way acquisition and construction would impact a minority population and take an historic district associated with the African American Foot neighborhood. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0138D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100483, draft EIS--180 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, December 29, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 13 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-09-03-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Prisons KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127555?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.title=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 29, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. [Part 12 of 31] T2 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. AN - 873127551; 14753-3_0012 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements to existing portions of US 50/63 (Rex Whitton Expressway) and the local street network in Cole County, Missouri are proposed. The Whitton Expressway is located in central Jefferson City near the downtown business district, the Missouri State Penitentiary (MSP) redevelopment site, the Old Munichberg and Central East Side neighborhoods, and the campus of Lincoln University. Transitions in roadway types from freeway to urban arterial and back to freeway lead to unsatisfactory levels of service and associated traffic congestion, especially during peak periods. The Whitton Expressway portion of the study corridor extends three miles and is bounded on the west by Bolivar Street, just east of the Tri-level interchange, and on the east by the Eastland Drive interchange. The area from 300 feet south of the Whitton Expressway north to McCarty Street is included. Access to the MSP site from portions of downtown and the Central East Side between McCarty Street and the prison is also being examined. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to historic properties, neighborhood cohesion, pedestrian access, and accessibility to businesses and institutions. In addition to a No Build Alternative, three mainline Whitton Expressway concepts and three prison access concepts are considered as reasonable alternatives in this final EIS. Under Alternative 4, an elevated viaduct starting just east of Broadway and returning to grade near the Jackson overpass would be constructed. Alternative 5 would involve construction of a parkway with a wide median and additional travel lanes; an optional elevated structure would carry through traffic separate from local traffic if deemed necessary. Under Alternative 6, a north-south overpass at Madison Street would be constructed and improvements would be made at Jefferson and Monroe. Under Alternative A, a new half-diamond interchange on Whitton Expressway at Lafayette Street would be constructed and Lafayette would be widened to four or five lanes. Alternative D would utilize a new half-diamond interchange at Lafayette and realign Clark Avenue. Alternative G is a slight permutation of Alternative D and would involve construction of a full diamond interchange at Lafayette. The preferred alternative is a combination of Alternative 6, the Madison Street overpass option, and Alternative G, a new full diamond interchange at Lafayette Street and a realigned Clark Avenue. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve roadway capacity, traffic operations, and traffic safety. Structural engineering would reduce the opportunities for head-on crashes and add room for recovery or avoidance of obstacles. Access to MSP, Lincoln University, and Jefferson City High School would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Full build-out of the preferred alternative would: directly affect historic resources such as the Craftsman/Monastery district and the property of the Lincoln University President's House; acquire the Quinn Chapel AME church; alter access to several downtown businesses; fully acquire 25 residences and four business properties; and partially acquire 16 residences and four business properties. Right-of-way acquisition and construction would impact a minority population and take an historic district associated with the African American Foot neighborhood. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0138D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100483, draft EIS--180 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, December 29, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-09-03-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Prisons KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127551?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.title=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 29, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. [Part 11 of 31] T2 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. AN - 873127546; 14753-3_0011 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements to existing portions of US 50/63 (Rex Whitton Expressway) and the local street network in Cole County, Missouri are proposed. The Whitton Expressway is located in central Jefferson City near the downtown business district, the Missouri State Penitentiary (MSP) redevelopment site, the Old Munichberg and Central East Side neighborhoods, and the campus of Lincoln University. Transitions in roadway types from freeway to urban arterial and back to freeway lead to unsatisfactory levels of service and associated traffic congestion, especially during peak periods. The Whitton Expressway portion of the study corridor extends three miles and is bounded on the west by Bolivar Street, just east of the Tri-level interchange, and on the east by the Eastland Drive interchange. The area from 300 feet south of the Whitton Expressway north to McCarty Street is included. Access to the MSP site from portions of downtown and the Central East Side between McCarty Street and the prison is also being examined. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to historic properties, neighborhood cohesion, pedestrian access, and accessibility to businesses and institutions. In addition to a No Build Alternative, three mainline Whitton Expressway concepts and three prison access concepts are considered as reasonable alternatives in this final EIS. Under Alternative 4, an elevated viaduct starting just east of Broadway and returning to grade near the Jackson overpass would be constructed. Alternative 5 would involve construction of a parkway with a wide median and additional travel lanes; an optional elevated structure would carry through traffic separate from local traffic if deemed necessary. Under Alternative 6, a north-south overpass at Madison Street would be constructed and improvements would be made at Jefferson and Monroe. Under Alternative A, a new half-diamond interchange on Whitton Expressway at Lafayette Street would be constructed and Lafayette would be widened to four or five lanes. Alternative D would utilize a new half-diamond interchange at Lafayette and realign Clark Avenue. Alternative G is a slight permutation of Alternative D and would involve construction of a full diamond interchange at Lafayette. The preferred alternative is a combination of Alternative 6, the Madison Street overpass option, and Alternative G, a new full diamond interchange at Lafayette Street and a realigned Clark Avenue. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve roadway capacity, traffic operations, and traffic safety. Structural engineering would reduce the opportunities for head-on crashes and add room for recovery or avoidance of obstacles. Access to MSP, Lincoln University, and Jefferson City High School would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Full build-out of the preferred alternative would: directly affect historic resources such as the Craftsman/Monastery district and the property of the Lincoln University President's House; acquire the Quinn Chapel AME church; alter access to several downtown businesses; fully acquire 25 residences and four business properties; and partially acquire 16 residences and four business properties. Right-of-way acquisition and construction would impact a minority population and take an historic district associated with the African American Foot neighborhood. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0138D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100483, draft EIS--180 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, December 29, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-09-03-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Prisons KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127546?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.title=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 29, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. [Part 9 of 31] T2 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. AN - 873127542; 14753-3_0009 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements to existing portions of US 50/63 (Rex Whitton Expressway) and the local street network in Cole County, Missouri are proposed. The Whitton Expressway is located in central Jefferson City near the downtown business district, the Missouri State Penitentiary (MSP) redevelopment site, the Old Munichberg and Central East Side neighborhoods, and the campus of Lincoln University. Transitions in roadway types from freeway to urban arterial and back to freeway lead to unsatisfactory levels of service and associated traffic congestion, especially during peak periods. The Whitton Expressway portion of the study corridor extends three miles and is bounded on the west by Bolivar Street, just east of the Tri-level interchange, and on the east by the Eastland Drive interchange. The area from 300 feet south of the Whitton Expressway north to McCarty Street is included. Access to the MSP site from portions of downtown and the Central East Side between McCarty Street and the prison is also being examined. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to historic properties, neighborhood cohesion, pedestrian access, and accessibility to businesses and institutions. In addition to a No Build Alternative, three mainline Whitton Expressway concepts and three prison access concepts are considered as reasonable alternatives in this final EIS. Under Alternative 4, an elevated viaduct starting just east of Broadway and returning to grade near the Jackson overpass would be constructed. Alternative 5 would involve construction of a parkway with a wide median and additional travel lanes; an optional elevated structure would carry through traffic separate from local traffic if deemed necessary. Under Alternative 6, a north-south overpass at Madison Street would be constructed and improvements would be made at Jefferson and Monroe. Under Alternative A, a new half-diamond interchange on Whitton Expressway at Lafayette Street would be constructed and Lafayette would be widened to four or five lanes. Alternative D would utilize a new half-diamond interchange at Lafayette and realign Clark Avenue. Alternative G is a slight permutation of Alternative D and would involve construction of a full diamond interchange at Lafayette. The preferred alternative is a combination of Alternative 6, the Madison Street overpass option, and Alternative G, a new full diamond interchange at Lafayette Street and a realigned Clark Avenue. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve roadway capacity, traffic operations, and traffic safety. Structural engineering would reduce the opportunities for head-on crashes and add room for recovery or avoidance of obstacles. Access to MSP, Lincoln University, and Jefferson City High School would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Full build-out of the preferred alternative would: directly affect historic resources such as the Craftsman/Monastery district and the property of the Lincoln University President's House; acquire the Quinn Chapel AME church; alter access to several downtown businesses; fully acquire 25 residences and four business properties; and partially acquire 16 residences and four business properties. Right-of-way acquisition and construction would impact a minority population and take an historic district associated with the African American Foot neighborhood. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0138D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100483, draft EIS--180 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, December 29, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-09-03-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Prisons KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127542?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.title=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 29, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. [Part 8 of 31] T2 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. AN - 873127536; 14753-3_0008 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements to existing portions of US 50/63 (Rex Whitton Expressway) and the local street network in Cole County, Missouri are proposed. The Whitton Expressway is located in central Jefferson City near the downtown business district, the Missouri State Penitentiary (MSP) redevelopment site, the Old Munichberg and Central East Side neighborhoods, and the campus of Lincoln University. Transitions in roadway types from freeway to urban arterial and back to freeway lead to unsatisfactory levels of service and associated traffic congestion, especially during peak periods. The Whitton Expressway portion of the study corridor extends three miles and is bounded on the west by Bolivar Street, just east of the Tri-level interchange, and on the east by the Eastland Drive interchange. The area from 300 feet south of the Whitton Expressway north to McCarty Street is included. Access to the MSP site from portions of downtown and the Central East Side between McCarty Street and the prison is also being examined. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to historic properties, neighborhood cohesion, pedestrian access, and accessibility to businesses and institutions. In addition to a No Build Alternative, three mainline Whitton Expressway concepts and three prison access concepts are considered as reasonable alternatives in this final EIS. Under Alternative 4, an elevated viaduct starting just east of Broadway and returning to grade near the Jackson overpass would be constructed. Alternative 5 would involve construction of a parkway with a wide median and additional travel lanes; an optional elevated structure would carry through traffic separate from local traffic if deemed necessary. Under Alternative 6, a north-south overpass at Madison Street would be constructed and improvements would be made at Jefferson and Monroe. Under Alternative A, a new half-diamond interchange on Whitton Expressway at Lafayette Street would be constructed and Lafayette would be widened to four or five lanes. Alternative D would utilize a new half-diamond interchange at Lafayette and realign Clark Avenue. Alternative G is a slight permutation of Alternative D and would involve construction of a full diamond interchange at Lafayette. The preferred alternative is a combination of Alternative 6, the Madison Street overpass option, and Alternative G, a new full diamond interchange at Lafayette Street and a realigned Clark Avenue. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve roadway capacity, traffic operations, and traffic safety. Structural engineering would reduce the opportunities for head-on crashes and add room for recovery or avoidance of obstacles. Access to MSP, Lincoln University, and Jefferson City High School would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Full build-out of the preferred alternative would: directly affect historic resources such as the Craftsman/Monastery district and the property of the Lincoln University President's House; acquire the Quinn Chapel AME church; alter access to several downtown businesses; fully acquire 25 residences and four business properties; and partially acquire 16 residences and four business properties. Right-of-way acquisition and construction would impact a minority population and take an historic district associated with the African American Foot neighborhood. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0138D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100483, draft EIS--180 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, December 29, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-09-03-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Prisons KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127536?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.title=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 29, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. [Part 7 of 31] T2 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. AN - 873127533; 14753-3_0007 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements to existing portions of US 50/63 (Rex Whitton Expressway) and the local street network in Cole County, Missouri are proposed. The Whitton Expressway is located in central Jefferson City near the downtown business district, the Missouri State Penitentiary (MSP) redevelopment site, the Old Munichberg and Central East Side neighborhoods, and the campus of Lincoln University. Transitions in roadway types from freeway to urban arterial and back to freeway lead to unsatisfactory levels of service and associated traffic congestion, especially during peak periods. The Whitton Expressway portion of the study corridor extends three miles and is bounded on the west by Bolivar Street, just east of the Tri-level interchange, and on the east by the Eastland Drive interchange. The area from 300 feet south of the Whitton Expressway north to McCarty Street is included. Access to the MSP site from portions of downtown and the Central East Side between McCarty Street and the prison is also being examined. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to historic properties, neighborhood cohesion, pedestrian access, and accessibility to businesses and institutions. In addition to a No Build Alternative, three mainline Whitton Expressway concepts and three prison access concepts are considered as reasonable alternatives in this final EIS. Under Alternative 4, an elevated viaduct starting just east of Broadway and returning to grade near the Jackson overpass would be constructed. Alternative 5 would involve construction of a parkway with a wide median and additional travel lanes; an optional elevated structure would carry through traffic separate from local traffic if deemed necessary. Under Alternative 6, a north-south overpass at Madison Street would be constructed and improvements would be made at Jefferson and Monroe. Under Alternative A, a new half-diamond interchange on Whitton Expressway at Lafayette Street would be constructed and Lafayette would be widened to four or five lanes. Alternative D would utilize a new half-diamond interchange at Lafayette and realign Clark Avenue. Alternative G is a slight permutation of Alternative D and would involve construction of a full diamond interchange at Lafayette. The preferred alternative is a combination of Alternative 6, the Madison Street overpass option, and Alternative G, a new full diamond interchange at Lafayette Street and a realigned Clark Avenue. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve roadway capacity, traffic operations, and traffic safety. Structural engineering would reduce the opportunities for head-on crashes and add room for recovery or avoidance of obstacles. Access to MSP, Lincoln University, and Jefferson City High School would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Full build-out of the preferred alternative would: directly affect historic resources such as the Craftsman/Monastery district and the property of the Lincoln University President's House; acquire the Quinn Chapel AME church; alter access to several downtown businesses; fully acquire 25 residences and four business properties; and partially acquire 16 residences and four business properties. Right-of-way acquisition and construction would impact a minority population and take an historic district associated with the African American Foot neighborhood. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0138D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100483, draft EIS--180 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, December 29, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-09-03-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Prisons KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127533?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.title=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 29, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. [Part 6 of 31] T2 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. AN - 873127528; 14753-3_0006 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements to existing portions of US 50/63 (Rex Whitton Expressway) and the local street network in Cole County, Missouri are proposed. The Whitton Expressway is located in central Jefferson City near the downtown business district, the Missouri State Penitentiary (MSP) redevelopment site, the Old Munichberg and Central East Side neighborhoods, and the campus of Lincoln University. Transitions in roadway types from freeway to urban arterial and back to freeway lead to unsatisfactory levels of service and associated traffic congestion, especially during peak periods. The Whitton Expressway portion of the study corridor extends three miles and is bounded on the west by Bolivar Street, just east of the Tri-level interchange, and on the east by the Eastland Drive interchange. The area from 300 feet south of the Whitton Expressway north to McCarty Street is included. Access to the MSP site from portions of downtown and the Central East Side between McCarty Street and the prison is also being examined. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to historic properties, neighborhood cohesion, pedestrian access, and accessibility to businesses and institutions. In addition to a No Build Alternative, three mainline Whitton Expressway concepts and three prison access concepts are considered as reasonable alternatives in this final EIS. Under Alternative 4, an elevated viaduct starting just east of Broadway and returning to grade near the Jackson overpass would be constructed. Alternative 5 would involve construction of a parkway with a wide median and additional travel lanes; an optional elevated structure would carry through traffic separate from local traffic if deemed necessary. Under Alternative 6, a north-south overpass at Madison Street would be constructed and improvements would be made at Jefferson and Monroe. Under Alternative A, a new half-diamond interchange on Whitton Expressway at Lafayette Street would be constructed and Lafayette would be widened to four or five lanes. Alternative D would utilize a new half-diamond interchange at Lafayette and realign Clark Avenue. Alternative G is a slight permutation of Alternative D and would involve construction of a full diamond interchange at Lafayette. The preferred alternative is a combination of Alternative 6, the Madison Street overpass option, and Alternative G, a new full diamond interchange at Lafayette Street and a realigned Clark Avenue. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve roadway capacity, traffic operations, and traffic safety. Structural engineering would reduce the opportunities for head-on crashes and add room for recovery or avoidance of obstacles. Access to MSP, Lincoln University, and Jefferson City High School would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Full build-out of the preferred alternative would: directly affect historic resources such as the Craftsman/Monastery district and the property of the Lincoln University President's House; acquire the Quinn Chapel AME church; alter access to several downtown businesses; fully acquire 25 residences and four business properties; and partially acquire 16 residences and four business properties. Right-of-way acquisition and construction would impact a minority population and take an historic district associated with the African American Foot neighborhood. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0138D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100483, draft EIS--180 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, December 29, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-09-03-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Prisons KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127528?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.title=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 29, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. [Part 5 of 31] T2 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. AN - 873127523; 14753-3_0005 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements to existing portions of US 50/63 (Rex Whitton Expressway) and the local street network in Cole County, Missouri are proposed. The Whitton Expressway is located in central Jefferson City near the downtown business district, the Missouri State Penitentiary (MSP) redevelopment site, the Old Munichberg and Central East Side neighborhoods, and the campus of Lincoln University. Transitions in roadway types from freeway to urban arterial and back to freeway lead to unsatisfactory levels of service and associated traffic congestion, especially during peak periods. The Whitton Expressway portion of the study corridor extends three miles and is bounded on the west by Bolivar Street, just east of the Tri-level interchange, and on the east by the Eastland Drive interchange. The area from 300 feet south of the Whitton Expressway north to McCarty Street is included. Access to the MSP site from portions of downtown and the Central East Side between McCarty Street and the prison is also being examined. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to historic properties, neighborhood cohesion, pedestrian access, and accessibility to businesses and institutions. In addition to a No Build Alternative, three mainline Whitton Expressway concepts and three prison access concepts are considered as reasonable alternatives in this final EIS. Under Alternative 4, an elevated viaduct starting just east of Broadway and returning to grade near the Jackson overpass would be constructed. Alternative 5 would involve construction of a parkway with a wide median and additional travel lanes; an optional elevated structure would carry through traffic separate from local traffic if deemed necessary. Under Alternative 6, a north-south overpass at Madison Street would be constructed and improvements would be made at Jefferson and Monroe. Under Alternative A, a new half-diamond interchange on Whitton Expressway at Lafayette Street would be constructed and Lafayette would be widened to four or five lanes. Alternative D would utilize a new half-diamond interchange at Lafayette and realign Clark Avenue. Alternative G is a slight permutation of Alternative D and would involve construction of a full diamond interchange at Lafayette. The preferred alternative is a combination of Alternative 6, the Madison Street overpass option, and Alternative G, a new full diamond interchange at Lafayette Street and a realigned Clark Avenue. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve roadway capacity, traffic operations, and traffic safety. Structural engineering would reduce the opportunities for head-on crashes and add room for recovery or avoidance of obstacles. Access to MSP, Lincoln University, and Jefferson City High School would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Full build-out of the preferred alternative would: directly affect historic resources such as the Craftsman/Monastery district and the property of the Lincoln University President's House; acquire the Quinn Chapel AME church; alter access to several downtown businesses; fully acquire 25 residences and four business properties; and partially acquire 16 residences and four business properties. Right-of-way acquisition and construction would impact a minority population and take an historic district associated with the African American Foot neighborhood. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0138D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100483, draft EIS--180 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, December 29, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-09-03-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Prisons KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127523?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.title=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 29, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. [Part 4 of 31] T2 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. AN - 873127519; 14753-3_0004 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements to existing portions of US 50/63 (Rex Whitton Expressway) and the local street network in Cole County, Missouri are proposed. The Whitton Expressway is located in central Jefferson City near the downtown business district, the Missouri State Penitentiary (MSP) redevelopment site, the Old Munichberg and Central East Side neighborhoods, and the campus of Lincoln University. Transitions in roadway types from freeway to urban arterial and back to freeway lead to unsatisfactory levels of service and associated traffic congestion, especially during peak periods. The Whitton Expressway portion of the study corridor extends three miles and is bounded on the west by Bolivar Street, just east of the Tri-level interchange, and on the east by the Eastland Drive interchange. The area from 300 feet south of the Whitton Expressway north to McCarty Street is included. Access to the MSP site from portions of downtown and the Central East Side between McCarty Street and the prison is also being examined. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to historic properties, neighborhood cohesion, pedestrian access, and accessibility to businesses and institutions. In addition to a No Build Alternative, three mainline Whitton Expressway concepts and three prison access concepts are considered as reasonable alternatives in this final EIS. Under Alternative 4, an elevated viaduct starting just east of Broadway and returning to grade near the Jackson overpass would be constructed. Alternative 5 would involve construction of a parkway with a wide median and additional travel lanes; an optional elevated structure would carry through traffic separate from local traffic if deemed necessary. Under Alternative 6, a north-south overpass at Madison Street would be constructed and improvements would be made at Jefferson and Monroe. Under Alternative A, a new half-diamond interchange on Whitton Expressway at Lafayette Street would be constructed and Lafayette would be widened to four or five lanes. Alternative D would utilize a new half-diamond interchange at Lafayette and realign Clark Avenue. Alternative G is a slight permutation of Alternative D and would involve construction of a full diamond interchange at Lafayette. The preferred alternative is a combination of Alternative 6, the Madison Street overpass option, and Alternative G, a new full diamond interchange at Lafayette Street and a realigned Clark Avenue. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve roadway capacity, traffic operations, and traffic safety. Structural engineering would reduce the opportunities for head-on crashes and add room for recovery or avoidance of obstacles. Access to MSP, Lincoln University, and Jefferson City High School would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Full build-out of the preferred alternative would: directly affect historic resources such as the Craftsman/Monastery district and the property of the Lincoln University President's House; acquire the Quinn Chapel AME church; alter access to several downtown businesses; fully acquire 25 residences and four business properties; and partially acquire 16 residences and four business properties. Right-of-way acquisition and construction would impact a minority population and take an historic district associated with the African American Foot neighborhood. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0138D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100483, draft EIS--180 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, December 29, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-09-03-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Prisons KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127519?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.title=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 29, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. [Part 22 of 31] T2 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. AN - 873127457; 14753-3_0022 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements to existing portions of US 50/63 (Rex Whitton Expressway) and the local street network in Cole County, Missouri are proposed. The Whitton Expressway is located in central Jefferson City near the downtown business district, the Missouri State Penitentiary (MSP) redevelopment site, the Old Munichberg and Central East Side neighborhoods, and the campus of Lincoln University. Transitions in roadway types from freeway to urban arterial and back to freeway lead to unsatisfactory levels of service and associated traffic congestion, especially during peak periods. The Whitton Expressway portion of the study corridor extends three miles and is bounded on the west by Bolivar Street, just east of the Tri-level interchange, and on the east by the Eastland Drive interchange. The area from 300 feet south of the Whitton Expressway north to McCarty Street is included. Access to the MSP site from portions of downtown and the Central East Side between McCarty Street and the prison is also being examined. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to historic properties, neighborhood cohesion, pedestrian access, and accessibility to businesses and institutions. In addition to a No Build Alternative, three mainline Whitton Expressway concepts and three prison access concepts are considered as reasonable alternatives in this final EIS. Under Alternative 4, an elevated viaduct starting just east of Broadway and returning to grade near the Jackson overpass would be constructed. Alternative 5 would involve construction of a parkway with a wide median and additional travel lanes; an optional elevated structure would carry through traffic separate from local traffic if deemed necessary. Under Alternative 6, a north-south overpass at Madison Street would be constructed and improvements would be made at Jefferson and Monroe. Under Alternative A, a new half-diamond interchange on Whitton Expressway at Lafayette Street would be constructed and Lafayette would be widened to four or five lanes. Alternative D would utilize a new half-diamond interchange at Lafayette and realign Clark Avenue. Alternative G is a slight permutation of Alternative D and would involve construction of a full diamond interchange at Lafayette. The preferred alternative is a combination of Alternative 6, the Madison Street overpass option, and Alternative G, a new full diamond interchange at Lafayette Street and a realigned Clark Avenue. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve roadway capacity, traffic operations, and traffic safety. Structural engineering would reduce the opportunities for head-on crashes and add room for recovery or avoidance of obstacles. Access to MSP, Lincoln University, and Jefferson City High School would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Full build-out of the preferred alternative would: directly affect historic resources such as the Craftsman/Monastery district and the property of the Lincoln University President's House; acquire the Quinn Chapel AME church; alter access to several downtown businesses; fully acquire 25 residences and four business properties; and partially acquire 16 residences and four business properties. Right-of-way acquisition and construction would impact a minority population and take an historic district associated with the African American Foot neighborhood. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0138D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100483, draft EIS--180 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, December 29, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 22 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-09-03-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Prisons KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127457?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.title=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 29, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. [Part 21 of 31] T2 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. AN - 873127449; 14753-3_0021 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements to existing portions of US 50/63 (Rex Whitton Expressway) and the local street network in Cole County, Missouri are proposed. The Whitton Expressway is located in central Jefferson City near the downtown business district, the Missouri State Penitentiary (MSP) redevelopment site, the Old Munichberg and Central East Side neighborhoods, and the campus of Lincoln University. Transitions in roadway types from freeway to urban arterial and back to freeway lead to unsatisfactory levels of service and associated traffic congestion, especially during peak periods. The Whitton Expressway portion of the study corridor extends three miles and is bounded on the west by Bolivar Street, just east of the Tri-level interchange, and on the east by the Eastland Drive interchange. The area from 300 feet south of the Whitton Expressway north to McCarty Street is included. Access to the MSP site from portions of downtown and the Central East Side between McCarty Street and the prison is also being examined. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to historic properties, neighborhood cohesion, pedestrian access, and accessibility to businesses and institutions. In addition to a No Build Alternative, three mainline Whitton Expressway concepts and three prison access concepts are considered as reasonable alternatives in this final EIS. Under Alternative 4, an elevated viaduct starting just east of Broadway and returning to grade near the Jackson overpass would be constructed. Alternative 5 would involve construction of a parkway with a wide median and additional travel lanes; an optional elevated structure would carry through traffic separate from local traffic if deemed necessary. Under Alternative 6, a north-south overpass at Madison Street would be constructed and improvements would be made at Jefferson and Monroe. Under Alternative A, a new half-diamond interchange on Whitton Expressway at Lafayette Street would be constructed and Lafayette would be widened to four or five lanes. Alternative D would utilize a new half-diamond interchange at Lafayette and realign Clark Avenue. Alternative G is a slight permutation of Alternative D and would involve construction of a full diamond interchange at Lafayette. The preferred alternative is a combination of Alternative 6, the Madison Street overpass option, and Alternative G, a new full diamond interchange at Lafayette Street and a realigned Clark Avenue. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve roadway capacity, traffic operations, and traffic safety. Structural engineering would reduce the opportunities for head-on crashes and add room for recovery or avoidance of obstacles. Access to MSP, Lincoln University, and Jefferson City High School would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Full build-out of the preferred alternative would: directly affect historic resources such as the Craftsman/Monastery district and the property of the Lincoln University President's House; acquire the Quinn Chapel AME church; alter access to several downtown businesses; fully acquire 25 residences and four business properties; and partially acquire 16 residences and four business properties. Right-of-way acquisition and construction would impact a minority population and take an historic district associated with the African American Foot neighborhood. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0138D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100483, draft EIS--180 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, December 29, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 21 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-09-03-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Prisons KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127449?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.title=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 29, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. [Part 20 of 31] T2 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. AN - 873127445; 14753-3_0020 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements to existing portions of US 50/63 (Rex Whitton Expressway) and the local street network in Cole County, Missouri are proposed. The Whitton Expressway is located in central Jefferson City near the downtown business district, the Missouri State Penitentiary (MSP) redevelopment site, the Old Munichberg and Central East Side neighborhoods, and the campus of Lincoln University. Transitions in roadway types from freeway to urban arterial and back to freeway lead to unsatisfactory levels of service and associated traffic congestion, especially during peak periods. The Whitton Expressway portion of the study corridor extends three miles and is bounded on the west by Bolivar Street, just east of the Tri-level interchange, and on the east by the Eastland Drive interchange. The area from 300 feet south of the Whitton Expressway north to McCarty Street is included. Access to the MSP site from portions of downtown and the Central East Side between McCarty Street and the prison is also being examined. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to historic properties, neighborhood cohesion, pedestrian access, and accessibility to businesses and institutions. In addition to a No Build Alternative, three mainline Whitton Expressway concepts and three prison access concepts are considered as reasonable alternatives in this final EIS. Under Alternative 4, an elevated viaduct starting just east of Broadway and returning to grade near the Jackson overpass would be constructed. Alternative 5 would involve construction of a parkway with a wide median and additional travel lanes; an optional elevated structure would carry through traffic separate from local traffic if deemed necessary. Under Alternative 6, a north-south overpass at Madison Street would be constructed and improvements would be made at Jefferson and Monroe. Under Alternative A, a new half-diamond interchange on Whitton Expressway at Lafayette Street would be constructed and Lafayette would be widened to four or five lanes. Alternative D would utilize a new half-diamond interchange at Lafayette and realign Clark Avenue. Alternative G is a slight permutation of Alternative D and would involve construction of a full diamond interchange at Lafayette. The preferred alternative is a combination of Alternative 6, the Madison Street overpass option, and Alternative G, a new full diamond interchange at Lafayette Street and a realigned Clark Avenue. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve roadway capacity, traffic operations, and traffic safety. Structural engineering would reduce the opportunities for head-on crashes and add room for recovery or avoidance of obstacles. Access to MSP, Lincoln University, and Jefferson City High School would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Full build-out of the preferred alternative would: directly affect historic resources such as the Craftsman/Monastery district and the property of the Lincoln University President's House; acquire the Quinn Chapel AME church; alter access to several downtown businesses; fully acquire 25 residences and four business properties; and partially acquire 16 residences and four business properties. Right-of-way acquisition and construction would impact a minority population and take an historic district associated with the African American Foot neighborhood. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0138D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100483, draft EIS--180 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, December 29, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 20 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-09-03-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Prisons KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127445?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.title=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 29, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. [Part 19 of 31] T2 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. AN - 873127439; 14753-3_0019 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements to existing portions of US 50/63 (Rex Whitton Expressway) and the local street network in Cole County, Missouri are proposed. The Whitton Expressway is located in central Jefferson City near the downtown business district, the Missouri State Penitentiary (MSP) redevelopment site, the Old Munichberg and Central East Side neighborhoods, and the campus of Lincoln University. Transitions in roadway types from freeway to urban arterial and back to freeway lead to unsatisfactory levels of service and associated traffic congestion, especially during peak periods. The Whitton Expressway portion of the study corridor extends three miles and is bounded on the west by Bolivar Street, just east of the Tri-level interchange, and on the east by the Eastland Drive interchange. The area from 300 feet south of the Whitton Expressway north to McCarty Street is included. Access to the MSP site from portions of downtown and the Central East Side between McCarty Street and the prison is also being examined. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to historic properties, neighborhood cohesion, pedestrian access, and accessibility to businesses and institutions. In addition to a No Build Alternative, three mainline Whitton Expressway concepts and three prison access concepts are considered as reasonable alternatives in this final EIS. Under Alternative 4, an elevated viaduct starting just east of Broadway and returning to grade near the Jackson overpass would be constructed. Alternative 5 would involve construction of a parkway with a wide median and additional travel lanes; an optional elevated structure would carry through traffic separate from local traffic if deemed necessary. Under Alternative 6, a north-south overpass at Madison Street would be constructed and improvements would be made at Jefferson and Monroe. Under Alternative A, a new half-diamond interchange on Whitton Expressway at Lafayette Street would be constructed and Lafayette would be widened to four or five lanes. Alternative D would utilize a new half-diamond interchange at Lafayette and realign Clark Avenue. Alternative G is a slight permutation of Alternative D and would involve construction of a full diamond interchange at Lafayette. The preferred alternative is a combination of Alternative 6, the Madison Street overpass option, and Alternative G, a new full diamond interchange at Lafayette Street and a realigned Clark Avenue. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve roadway capacity, traffic operations, and traffic safety. Structural engineering would reduce the opportunities for head-on crashes and add room for recovery or avoidance of obstacles. Access to MSP, Lincoln University, and Jefferson City High School would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Full build-out of the preferred alternative would: directly affect historic resources such as the Craftsman/Monastery district and the property of the Lincoln University President's House; acquire the Quinn Chapel AME church; alter access to several downtown businesses; fully acquire 25 residences and four business properties; and partially acquire 16 residences and four business properties. Right-of-way acquisition and construction would impact a minority population and take an historic district associated with the African American Foot neighborhood. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0138D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100483, draft EIS--180 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, December 29, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 19 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-09-03-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Prisons KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127439?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.title=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 29, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. [Part 18 of 31] T2 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. AN - 873127431; 14753-3_0018 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements to existing portions of US 50/63 (Rex Whitton Expressway) and the local street network in Cole County, Missouri are proposed. The Whitton Expressway is located in central Jefferson City near the downtown business district, the Missouri State Penitentiary (MSP) redevelopment site, the Old Munichberg and Central East Side neighborhoods, and the campus of Lincoln University. Transitions in roadway types from freeway to urban arterial and back to freeway lead to unsatisfactory levels of service and associated traffic congestion, especially during peak periods. The Whitton Expressway portion of the study corridor extends three miles and is bounded on the west by Bolivar Street, just east of the Tri-level interchange, and on the east by the Eastland Drive interchange. The area from 300 feet south of the Whitton Expressway north to McCarty Street is included. Access to the MSP site from portions of downtown and the Central East Side between McCarty Street and the prison is also being examined. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to historic properties, neighborhood cohesion, pedestrian access, and accessibility to businesses and institutions. In addition to a No Build Alternative, three mainline Whitton Expressway concepts and three prison access concepts are considered as reasonable alternatives in this final EIS. Under Alternative 4, an elevated viaduct starting just east of Broadway and returning to grade near the Jackson overpass would be constructed. Alternative 5 would involve construction of a parkway with a wide median and additional travel lanes; an optional elevated structure would carry through traffic separate from local traffic if deemed necessary. Under Alternative 6, a north-south overpass at Madison Street would be constructed and improvements would be made at Jefferson and Monroe. Under Alternative A, a new half-diamond interchange on Whitton Expressway at Lafayette Street would be constructed and Lafayette would be widened to four or five lanes. Alternative D would utilize a new half-diamond interchange at Lafayette and realign Clark Avenue. Alternative G is a slight permutation of Alternative D and would involve construction of a full diamond interchange at Lafayette. The preferred alternative is a combination of Alternative 6, the Madison Street overpass option, and Alternative G, a new full diamond interchange at Lafayette Street and a realigned Clark Avenue. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve roadway capacity, traffic operations, and traffic safety. Structural engineering would reduce the opportunities for head-on crashes and add room for recovery or avoidance of obstacles. Access to MSP, Lincoln University, and Jefferson City High School would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Full build-out of the preferred alternative would: directly affect historic resources such as the Craftsman/Monastery district and the property of the Lincoln University President's House; acquire the Quinn Chapel AME church; alter access to several downtown businesses; fully acquire 25 residences and four business properties; and partially acquire 16 residences and four business properties. Right-of-way acquisition and construction would impact a minority population and take an historic district associated with the African American Foot neighborhood. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0138D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100483, draft EIS--180 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, December 29, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 18 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-09-03-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Prisons KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127431?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.title=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 29, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. [Part 17 of 31] T2 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. AN - 873127427; 14753-3_0017 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements to existing portions of US 50/63 (Rex Whitton Expressway) and the local street network in Cole County, Missouri are proposed. The Whitton Expressway is located in central Jefferson City near the downtown business district, the Missouri State Penitentiary (MSP) redevelopment site, the Old Munichberg and Central East Side neighborhoods, and the campus of Lincoln University. Transitions in roadway types from freeway to urban arterial and back to freeway lead to unsatisfactory levels of service and associated traffic congestion, especially during peak periods. The Whitton Expressway portion of the study corridor extends three miles and is bounded on the west by Bolivar Street, just east of the Tri-level interchange, and on the east by the Eastland Drive interchange. The area from 300 feet south of the Whitton Expressway north to McCarty Street is included. Access to the MSP site from portions of downtown and the Central East Side between McCarty Street and the prison is also being examined. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to historic properties, neighborhood cohesion, pedestrian access, and accessibility to businesses and institutions. In addition to a No Build Alternative, three mainline Whitton Expressway concepts and three prison access concepts are considered as reasonable alternatives in this final EIS. Under Alternative 4, an elevated viaduct starting just east of Broadway and returning to grade near the Jackson overpass would be constructed. Alternative 5 would involve construction of a parkway with a wide median and additional travel lanes; an optional elevated structure would carry through traffic separate from local traffic if deemed necessary. Under Alternative 6, a north-south overpass at Madison Street would be constructed and improvements would be made at Jefferson and Monroe. Under Alternative A, a new half-diamond interchange on Whitton Expressway at Lafayette Street would be constructed and Lafayette would be widened to four or five lanes. Alternative D would utilize a new half-diamond interchange at Lafayette and realign Clark Avenue. Alternative G is a slight permutation of Alternative D and would involve construction of a full diamond interchange at Lafayette. The preferred alternative is a combination of Alternative 6, the Madison Street overpass option, and Alternative G, a new full diamond interchange at Lafayette Street and a realigned Clark Avenue. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve roadway capacity, traffic operations, and traffic safety. Structural engineering would reduce the opportunities for head-on crashes and add room for recovery or avoidance of obstacles. Access to MSP, Lincoln University, and Jefferson City High School would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Full build-out of the preferred alternative would: directly affect historic resources such as the Craftsman/Monastery district and the property of the Lincoln University President's House; acquire the Quinn Chapel AME church; alter access to several downtown businesses; fully acquire 25 residences and four business properties; and partially acquire 16 residences and four business properties. Right-of-way acquisition and construction would impact a minority population and take an historic district associated with the African American Foot neighborhood. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0138D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100483, draft EIS--180 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, December 29, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 17 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-09-03-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Prisons KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127427?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.title=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 29, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. [Part 27 of 31] T2 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. AN - 873127313; 14753-3_0027 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements to existing portions of US 50/63 (Rex Whitton Expressway) and the local street network in Cole County, Missouri are proposed. The Whitton Expressway is located in central Jefferson City near the downtown business district, the Missouri State Penitentiary (MSP) redevelopment site, the Old Munichberg and Central East Side neighborhoods, and the campus of Lincoln University. Transitions in roadway types from freeway to urban arterial and back to freeway lead to unsatisfactory levels of service and associated traffic congestion, especially during peak periods. The Whitton Expressway portion of the study corridor extends three miles and is bounded on the west by Bolivar Street, just east of the Tri-level interchange, and on the east by the Eastland Drive interchange. The area from 300 feet south of the Whitton Expressway north to McCarty Street is included. Access to the MSP site from portions of downtown and the Central East Side between McCarty Street and the prison is also being examined. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to historic properties, neighborhood cohesion, pedestrian access, and accessibility to businesses and institutions. In addition to a No Build Alternative, three mainline Whitton Expressway concepts and three prison access concepts are considered as reasonable alternatives in this final EIS. Under Alternative 4, an elevated viaduct starting just east of Broadway and returning to grade near the Jackson overpass would be constructed. Alternative 5 would involve construction of a parkway with a wide median and additional travel lanes; an optional elevated structure would carry through traffic separate from local traffic if deemed necessary. Under Alternative 6, a north-south overpass at Madison Street would be constructed and improvements would be made at Jefferson and Monroe. Under Alternative A, a new half-diamond interchange on Whitton Expressway at Lafayette Street would be constructed and Lafayette would be widened to four or five lanes. Alternative D would utilize a new half-diamond interchange at Lafayette and realign Clark Avenue. Alternative G is a slight permutation of Alternative D and would involve construction of a full diamond interchange at Lafayette. The preferred alternative is a combination of Alternative 6, the Madison Street overpass option, and Alternative G, a new full diamond interchange at Lafayette Street and a realigned Clark Avenue. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve roadway capacity, traffic operations, and traffic safety. Structural engineering would reduce the opportunities for head-on crashes and add room for recovery or avoidance of obstacles. Access to MSP, Lincoln University, and Jefferson City High School would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Full build-out of the preferred alternative would: directly affect historic resources such as the Craftsman/Monastery district and the property of the Lincoln University President's House; acquire the Quinn Chapel AME church; alter access to several downtown businesses; fully acquire 25 residences and four business properties; and partially acquire 16 residences and four business properties. Right-of-way acquisition and construction would impact a minority population and take an historic district associated with the African American Foot neighborhood. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0138D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100483, draft EIS--180 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, December 29, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 27 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-09-03-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Prisons KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127313?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.title=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 29, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. [Part 26 of 31] T2 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. AN - 873127306; 14753-3_0026 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements to existing portions of US 50/63 (Rex Whitton Expressway) and the local street network in Cole County, Missouri are proposed. The Whitton Expressway is located in central Jefferson City near the downtown business district, the Missouri State Penitentiary (MSP) redevelopment site, the Old Munichberg and Central East Side neighborhoods, and the campus of Lincoln University. Transitions in roadway types from freeway to urban arterial and back to freeway lead to unsatisfactory levels of service and associated traffic congestion, especially during peak periods. The Whitton Expressway portion of the study corridor extends three miles and is bounded on the west by Bolivar Street, just east of the Tri-level interchange, and on the east by the Eastland Drive interchange. The area from 300 feet south of the Whitton Expressway north to McCarty Street is included. Access to the MSP site from portions of downtown and the Central East Side between McCarty Street and the prison is also being examined. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to historic properties, neighborhood cohesion, pedestrian access, and accessibility to businesses and institutions. In addition to a No Build Alternative, three mainline Whitton Expressway concepts and three prison access concepts are considered as reasonable alternatives in this final EIS. Under Alternative 4, an elevated viaduct starting just east of Broadway and returning to grade near the Jackson overpass would be constructed. Alternative 5 would involve construction of a parkway with a wide median and additional travel lanes; an optional elevated structure would carry through traffic separate from local traffic if deemed necessary. Under Alternative 6, a north-south overpass at Madison Street would be constructed and improvements would be made at Jefferson and Monroe. Under Alternative A, a new half-diamond interchange on Whitton Expressway at Lafayette Street would be constructed and Lafayette would be widened to four or five lanes. Alternative D would utilize a new half-diamond interchange at Lafayette and realign Clark Avenue. Alternative G is a slight permutation of Alternative D and would involve construction of a full diamond interchange at Lafayette. The preferred alternative is a combination of Alternative 6, the Madison Street overpass option, and Alternative G, a new full diamond interchange at Lafayette Street and a realigned Clark Avenue. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve roadway capacity, traffic operations, and traffic safety. Structural engineering would reduce the opportunities for head-on crashes and add room for recovery or avoidance of obstacles. Access to MSP, Lincoln University, and Jefferson City High School would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Full build-out of the preferred alternative would: directly affect historic resources such as the Craftsman/Monastery district and the property of the Lincoln University President's House; acquire the Quinn Chapel AME church; alter access to several downtown businesses; fully acquire 25 residences and four business properties; and partially acquire 16 residences and four business properties. Right-of-way acquisition and construction would impact a minority population and take an historic district associated with the African American Foot neighborhood. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0138D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100483, draft EIS--180 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, December 29, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 26 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-09-03-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Prisons KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127306?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.title=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 29, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. [Part 25 of 31] T2 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. AN - 873127303; 14753-3_0025 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements to existing portions of US 50/63 (Rex Whitton Expressway) and the local street network in Cole County, Missouri are proposed. The Whitton Expressway is located in central Jefferson City near the downtown business district, the Missouri State Penitentiary (MSP) redevelopment site, the Old Munichberg and Central East Side neighborhoods, and the campus of Lincoln University. Transitions in roadway types from freeway to urban arterial and back to freeway lead to unsatisfactory levels of service and associated traffic congestion, especially during peak periods. The Whitton Expressway portion of the study corridor extends three miles and is bounded on the west by Bolivar Street, just east of the Tri-level interchange, and on the east by the Eastland Drive interchange. The area from 300 feet south of the Whitton Expressway north to McCarty Street is included. Access to the MSP site from portions of downtown and the Central East Side between McCarty Street and the prison is also being examined. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to historic properties, neighborhood cohesion, pedestrian access, and accessibility to businesses and institutions. In addition to a No Build Alternative, three mainline Whitton Expressway concepts and three prison access concepts are considered as reasonable alternatives in this final EIS. Under Alternative 4, an elevated viaduct starting just east of Broadway and returning to grade near the Jackson overpass would be constructed. Alternative 5 would involve construction of a parkway with a wide median and additional travel lanes; an optional elevated structure would carry through traffic separate from local traffic if deemed necessary. Under Alternative 6, a north-south overpass at Madison Street would be constructed and improvements would be made at Jefferson and Monroe. Under Alternative A, a new half-diamond interchange on Whitton Expressway at Lafayette Street would be constructed and Lafayette would be widened to four or five lanes. Alternative D would utilize a new half-diamond interchange at Lafayette and realign Clark Avenue. Alternative G is a slight permutation of Alternative D and would involve construction of a full diamond interchange at Lafayette. The preferred alternative is a combination of Alternative 6, the Madison Street overpass option, and Alternative G, a new full diamond interchange at Lafayette Street and a realigned Clark Avenue. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve roadway capacity, traffic operations, and traffic safety. Structural engineering would reduce the opportunities for head-on crashes and add room for recovery or avoidance of obstacles. Access to MSP, Lincoln University, and Jefferson City High School would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Full build-out of the preferred alternative would: directly affect historic resources such as the Craftsman/Monastery district and the property of the Lincoln University President's House; acquire the Quinn Chapel AME church; alter access to several downtown businesses; fully acquire 25 residences and four business properties; and partially acquire 16 residences and four business properties. Right-of-way acquisition and construction would impact a minority population and take an historic district associated with the African American Foot neighborhood. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0138D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100483, draft EIS--180 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, December 29, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 25 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-09-03-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Prisons KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127303?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.title=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 29, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. [Part 24 of 31] T2 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. AN - 873127296; 14753-3_0024 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements to existing portions of US 50/63 (Rex Whitton Expressway) and the local street network in Cole County, Missouri are proposed. The Whitton Expressway is located in central Jefferson City near the downtown business district, the Missouri State Penitentiary (MSP) redevelopment site, the Old Munichberg and Central East Side neighborhoods, and the campus of Lincoln University. Transitions in roadway types from freeway to urban arterial and back to freeway lead to unsatisfactory levels of service and associated traffic congestion, especially during peak periods. The Whitton Expressway portion of the study corridor extends three miles and is bounded on the west by Bolivar Street, just east of the Tri-level interchange, and on the east by the Eastland Drive interchange. The area from 300 feet south of the Whitton Expressway north to McCarty Street is included. Access to the MSP site from portions of downtown and the Central East Side between McCarty Street and the prison is also being examined. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to historic properties, neighborhood cohesion, pedestrian access, and accessibility to businesses and institutions. In addition to a No Build Alternative, three mainline Whitton Expressway concepts and three prison access concepts are considered as reasonable alternatives in this final EIS. Under Alternative 4, an elevated viaduct starting just east of Broadway and returning to grade near the Jackson overpass would be constructed. Alternative 5 would involve construction of a parkway with a wide median and additional travel lanes; an optional elevated structure would carry through traffic separate from local traffic if deemed necessary. Under Alternative 6, a north-south overpass at Madison Street would be constructed and improvements would be made at Jefferson and Monroe. Under Alternative A, a new half-diamond interchange on Whitton Expressway at Lafayette Street would be constructed and Lafayette would be widened to four or five lanes. Alternative D would utilize a new half-diamond interchange at Lafayette and realign Clark Avenue. Alternative G is a slight permutation of Alternative D and would involve construction of a full diamond interchange at Lafayette. The preferred alternative is a combination of Alternative 6, the Madison Street overpass option, and Alternative G, a new full diamond interchange at Lafayette Street and a realigned Clark Avenue. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve roadway capacity, traffic operations, and traffic safety. Structural engineering would reduce the opportunities for head-on crashes and add room for recovery or avoidance of obstacles. Access to MSP, Lincoln University, and Jefferson City High School would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Full build-out of the preferred alternative would: directly affect historic resources such as the Craftsman/Monastery district and the property of the Lincoln University President's House; acquire the Quinn Chapel AME church; alter access to several downtown businesses; fully acquire 25 residences and four business properties; and partially acquire 16 residences and four business properties. Right-of-way acquisition and construction would impact a minority population and take an historic district associated with the African American Foot neighborhood. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0138D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100483, draft EIS--180 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, December 29, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 24 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-09-03-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Prisons KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127296?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.title=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 29, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. [Part 23 of 31] T2 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. AN - 873127290; 14753-3_0023 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements to existing portions of US 50/63 (Rex Whitton Expressway) and the local street network in Cole County, Missouri are proposed. The Whitton Expressway is located in central Jefferson City near the downtown business district, the Missouri State Penitentiary (MSP) redevelopment site, the Old Munichberg and Central East Side neighborhoods, and the campus of Lincoln University. Transitions in roadway types from freeway to urban arterial and back to freeway lead to unsatisfactory levels of service and associated traffic congestion, especially during peak periods. The Whitton Expressway portion of the study corridor extends three miles and is bounded on the west by Bolivar Street, just east of the Tri-level interchange, and on the east by the Eastland Drive interchange. The area from 300 feet south of the Whitton Expressway north to McCarty Street is included. Access to the MSP site from portions of downtown and the Central East Side between McCarty Street and the prison is also being examined. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to historic properties, neighborhood cohesion, pedestrian access, and accessibility to businesses and institutions. In addition to a No Build Alternative, three mainline Whitton Expressway concepts and three prison access concepts are considered as reasonable alternatives in this final EIS. Under Alternative 4, an elevated viaduct starting just east of Broadway and returning to grade near the Jackson overpass would be constructed. Alternative 5 would involve construction of a parkway with a wide median and additional travel lanes; an optional elevated structure would carry through traffic separate from local traffic if deemed necessary. Under Alternative 6, a north-south overpass at Madison Street would be constructed and improvements would be made at Jefferson and Monroe. Under Alternative A, a new half-diamond interchange on Whitton Expressway at Lafayette Street would be constructed and Lafayette would be widened to four or five lanes. Alternative D would utilize a new half-diamond interchange at Lafayette and realign Clark Avenue. Alternative G is a slight permutation of Alternative D and would involve construction of a full diamond interchange at Lafayette. The preferred alternative is a combination of Alternative 6, the Madison Street overpass option, and Alternative G, a new full diamond interchange at Lafayette Street and a realigned Clark Avenue. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve roadway capacity, traffic operations, and traffic safety. Structural engineering would reduce the opportunities for head-on crashes and add room for recovery or avoidance of obstacles. Access to MSP, Lincoln University, and Jefferson City High School would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Full build-out of the preferred alternative would: directly affect historic resources such as the Craftsman/Monastery district and the property of the Lincoln University President's House; acquire the Quinn Chapel AME church; alter access to several downtown businesses; fully acquire 25 residences and four business properties; and partially acquire 16 residences and four business properties. Right-of-way acquisition and construction would impact a minority population and take an historic district associated with the African American Foot neighborhood. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0138D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100483, draft EIS--180 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, December 29, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 23 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-09-03-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Prisons KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127290?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.title=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 29, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. [Part 10 of 31] T2 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. AN - 873127286; 14753-3_0010 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements to existing portions of US 50/63 (Rex Whitton Expressway) and the local street network in Cole County, Missouri are proposed. The Whitton Expressway is located in central Jefferson City near the downtown business district, the Missouri State Penitentiary (MSP) redevelopment site, the Old Munichberg and Central East Side neighborhoods, and the campus of Lincoln University. Transitions in roadway types from freeway to urban arterial and back to freeway lead to unsatisfactory levels of service and associated traffic congestion, especially during peak periods. The Whitton Expressway portion of the study corridor extends three miles and is bounded on the west by Bolivar Street, just east of the Tri-level interchange, and on the east by the Eastland Drive interchange. The area from 300 feet south of the Whitton Expressway north to McCarty Street is included. Access to the MSP site from portions of downtown and the Central East Side between McCarty Street and the prison is also being examined. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to historic properties, neighborhood cohesion, pedestrian access, and accessibility to businesses and institutions. In addition to a No Build Alternative, three mainline Whitton Expressway concepts and three prison access concepts are considered as reasonable alternatives in this final EIS. Under Alternative 4, an elevated viaduct starting just east of Broadway and returning to grade near the Jackson overpass would be constructed. Alternative 5 would involve construction of a parkway with a wide median and additional travel lanes; an optional elevated structure would carry through traffic separate from local traffic if deemed necessary. Under Alternative 6, a north-south overpass at Madison Street would be constructed and improvements would be made at Jefferson and Monroe. Under Alternative A, a new half-diamond interchange on Whitton Expressway at Lafayette Street would be constructed and Lafayette would be widened to four or five lanes. Alternative D would utilize a new half-diamond interchange at Lafayette and realign Clark Avenue. Alternative G is a slight permutation of Alternative D and would involve construction of a full diamond interchange at Lafayette. The preferred alternative is a combination of Alternative 6, the Madison Street overpass option, and Alternative G, a new full diamond interchange at Lafayette Street and a realigned Clark Avenue. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve roadway capacity, traffic operations, and traffic safety. Structural engineering would reduce the opportunities for head-on crashes and add room for recovery or avoidance of obstacles. Access to MSP, Lincoln University, and Jefferson City High School would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Full build-out of the preferred alternative would: directly affect historic resources such as the Craftsman/Monastery district and the property of the Lincoln University President's House; acquire the Quinn Chapel AME church; alter access to several downtown businesses; fully acquire 25 residences and four business properties; and partially acquire 16 residences and four business properties. Right-of-way acquisition and construction would impact a minority population and take an historic district associated with the African American Foot neighborhood. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0138D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100483, draft EIS--180 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, December 29, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-09-03-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Prisons KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127286?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.title=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 29, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. [Part 3 of 31] T2 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. AN - 873126940; 14753-3_0003 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements to existing portions of US 50/63 (Rex Whitton Expressway) and the local street network in Cole County, Missouri are proposed. The Whitton Expressway is located in central Jefferson City near the downtown business district, the Missouri State Penitentiary (MSP) redevelopment site, the Old Munichberg and Central East Side neighborhoods, and the campus of Lincoln University. Transitions in roadway types from freeway to urban arterial and back to freeway lead to unsatisfactory levels of service and associated traffic congestion, especially during peak periods. The Whitton Expressway portion of the study corridor extends three miles and is bounded on the west by Bolivar Street, just east of the Tri-level interchange, and on the east by the Eastland Drive interchange. The area from 300 feet south of the Whitton Expressway north to McCarty Street is included. Access to the MSP site from portions of downtown and the Central East Side between McCarty Street and the prison is also being examined. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to historic properties, neighborhood cohesion, pedestrian access, and accessibility to businesses and institutions. In addition to a No Build Alternative, three mainline Whitton Expressway concepts and three prison access concepts are considered as reasonable alternatives in this final EIS. Under Alternative 4, an elevated viaduct starting just east of Broadway and returning to grade near the Jackson overpass would be constructed. Alternative 5 would involve construction of a parkway with a wide median and additional travel lanes; an optional elevated structure would carry through traffic separate from local traffic if deemed necessary. Under Alternative 6, a north-south overpass at Madison Street would be constructed and improvements would be made at Jefferson and Monroe. Under Alternative A, a new half-diamond interchange on Whitton Expressway at Lafayette Street would be constructed and Lafayette would be widened to four or five lanes. Alternative D would utilize a new half-diamond interchange at Lafayette and realign Clark Avenue. Alternative G is a slight permutation of Alternative D and would involve construction of a full diamond interchange at Lafayette. The preferred alternative is a combination of Alternative 6, the Madison Street overpass option, and Alternative G, a new full diamond interchange at Lafayette Street and a realigned Clark Avenue. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve roadway capacity, traffic operations, and traffic safety. Structural engineering would reduce the opportunities for head-on crashes and add room for recovery or avoidance of obstacles. Access to MSP, Lincoln University, and Jefferson City High School would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Full build-out of the preferred alternative would: directly affect historic resources such as the Craftsman/Monastery district and the property of the Lincoln University President's House; acquire the Quinn Chapel AME church; alter access to several downtown businesses; fully acquire 25 residences and four business properties; and partially acquire 16 residences and four business properties. Right-of-way acquisition and construction would impact a minority population and take an historic district associated with the African American Foot neighborhood. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0138D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100483, draft EIS--180 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, December 29, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-09-03-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Prisons KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126940?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.title=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 29, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. [Part 2 of 31] T2 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. AN - 873126931; 14753-3_0002 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements to existing portions of US 50/63 (Rex Whitton Expressway) and the local street network in Cole County, Missouri are proposed. The Whitton Expressway is located in central Jefferson City near the downtown business district, the Missouri State Penitentiary (MSP) redevelopment site, the Old Munichberg and Central East Side neighborhoods, and the campus of Lincoln University. Transitions in roadway types from freeway to urban arterial and back to freeway lead to unsatisfactory levels of service and associated traffic congestion, especially during peak periods. The Whitton Expressway portion of the study corridor extends three miles and is bounded on the west by Bolivar Street, just east of the Tri-level interchange, and on the east by the Eastland Drive interchange. The area from 300 feet south of the Whitton Expressway north to McCarty Street is included. Access to the MSP site from portions of downtown and the Central East Side between McCarty Street and the prison is also being examined. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to historic properties, neighborhood cohesion, pedestrian access, and accessibility to businesses and institutions. In addition to a No Build Alternative, three mainline Whitton Expressway concepts and three prison access concepts are considered as reasonable alternatives in this final EIS. Under Alternative 4, an elevated viaduct starting just east of Broadway and returning to grade near the Jackson overpass would be constructed. Alternative 5 would involve construction of a parkway with a wide median and additional travel lanes; an optional elevated structure would carry through traffic separate from local traffic if deemed necessary. Under Alternative 6, a north-south overpass at Madison Street would be constructed and improvements would be made at Jefferson and Monroe. Under Alternative A, a new half-diamond interchange on Whitton Expressway at Lafayette Street would be constructed and Lafayette would be widened to four or five lanes. Alternative D would utilize a new half-diamond interchange at Lafayette and realign Clark Avenue. Alternative G is a slight permutation of Alternative D and would involve construction of a full diamond interchange at Lafayette. The preferred alternative is a combination of Alternative 6, the Madison Street overpass option, and Alternative G, a new full diamond interchange at Lafayette Street and a realigned Clark Avenue. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve roadway capacity, traffic operations, and traffic safety. Structural engineering would reduce the opportunities for head-on crashes and add room for recovery or avoidance of obstacles. Access to MSP, Lincoln University, and Jefferson City High School would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Full build-out of the preferred alternative would: directly affect historic resources such as the Craftsman/Monastery district and the property of the Lincoln University President's House; acquire the Quinn Chapel AME church; alter access to several downtown businesses; fully acquire 25 residences and four business properties; and partially acquire 16 residences and four business properties. Right-of-way acquisition and construction would impact a minority population and take an historic district associated with the African American Foot neighborhood. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0138D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100483, draft EIS--180 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, December 29, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-09-03-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Prisons KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126931?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.title=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 29, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. [Part 1 of 31] T2 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. AN - 873126922; 14753-3_0001 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements to existing portions of US 50/63 (Rex Whitton Expressway) and the local street network in Cole County, Missouri are proposed. The Whitton Expressway is located in central Jefferson City near the downtown business district, the Missouri State Penitentiary (MSP) redevelopment site, the Old Munichberg and Central East Side neighborhoods, and the campus of Lincoln University. Transitions in roadway types from freeway to urban arterial and back to freeway lead to unsatisfactory levels of service and associated traffic congestion, especially during peak periods. The Whitton Expressway portion of the study corridor extends three miles and is bounded on the west by Bolivar Street, just east of the Tri-level interchange, and on the east by the Eastland Drive interchange. The area from 300 feet south of the Whitton Expressway north to McCarty Street is included. Access to the MSP site from portions of downtown and the Central East Side between McCarty Street and the prison is also being examined. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to historic properties, neighborhood cohesion, pedestrian access, and accessibility to businesses and institutions. In addition to a No Build Alternative, three mainline Whitton Expressway concepts and three prison access concepts are considered as reasonable alternatives in this final EIS. Under Alternative 4, an elevated viaduct starting just east of Broadway and returning to grade near the Jackson overpass would be constructed. Alternative 5 would involve construction of a parkway with a wide median and additional travel lanes; an optional elevated structure would carry through traffic separate from local traffic if deemed necessary. Under Alternative 6, a north-south overpass at Madison Street would be constructed and improvements would be made at Jefferson and Monroe. Under Alternative A, a new half-diamond interchange on Whitton Expressway at Lafayette Street would be constructed and Lafayette would be widened to four or five lanes. Alternative D would utilize a new half-diamond interchange at Lafayette and realign Clark Avenue. Alternative G is a slight permutation of Alternative D and would involve construction of a full diamond interchange at Lafayette. The preferred alternative is a combination of Alternative 6, the Madison Street overpass option, and Alternative G, a new full diamond interchange at Lafayette Street and a realigned Clark Avenue. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve roadway capacity, traffic operations, and traffic safety. Structural engineering would reduce the opportunities for head-on crashes and add room for recovery or avoidance of obstacles. Access to MSP, Lincoln University, and Jefferson City High School would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Full build-out of the preferred alternative would: directly affect historic resources such as the Craftsman/Monastery district and the property of the Lincoln University President's House; acquire the Quinn Chapel AME church; alter access to several downtown businesses; fully acquire 25 residences and four business properties; and partially acquire 16 residences and four business properties. Right-of-way acquisition and construction would impact a minority population and take an historic district associated with the African American Foot neighborhood. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0138D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100483, draft EIS--180 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, December 29, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-09-03-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Prisons KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126922?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.title=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 29, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WHITTON EXPRESSWAY, JEFFERSON CITY, COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI. AN - 16379619; 14753 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements to existing portions of US 50/63 (Rex Whitton Expressway) and the local street network in Cole County, Missouri are proposed. The Whitton Expressway is located in central Jefferson City near the downtown business district, the Missouri State Penitentiary (MSP) redevelopment site, the Old Munichberg and Central East Side neighborhoods, and the campus of Lincoln University. Transitions in roadway types from freeway to urban arterial and back to freeway lead to unsatisfactory levels of service and associated traffic congestion, especially during peak periods. The Whitton Expressway portion of the study corridor extends three miles and is bounded on the west by Bolivar Street, just east of the Tri-level interchange, and on the east by the Eastland Drive interchange. The area from 300 feet south of the Whitton Expressway north to McCarty Street is included. Access to the MSP site from portions of downtown and the Central East Side between McCarty Street and the prison is also being examined. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to historic properties, neighborhood cohesion, pedestrian access, and accessibility to businesses and institutions. In addition to a No Build Alternative, three mainline Whitton Expressway concepts and three prison access concepts are considered as reasonable alternatives in this final EIS. Under Alternative 4, an elevated viaduct starting just east of Broadway and returning to grade near the Jackson overpass would be constructed. Alternative 5 would involve construction of a parkway with a wide median and additional travel lanes; an optional elevated structure would carry through traffic separate from local traffic if deemed necessary. Under Alternative 6, a north-south overpass at Madison Street would be constructed and improvements would be made at Jefferson and Monroe. Under Alternative A, a new half-diamond interchange on Whitton Expressway at Lafayette Street would be constructed and Lafayette would be widened to four or five lanes. Alternative D would utilize a new half-diamond interchange at Lafayette and realign Clark Avenue. Alternative G is a slight permutation of Alternative D and would involve construction of a full diamond interchange at Lafayette. The preferred alternative is a combination of Alternative 6, the Madison Street overpass option, and Alternative G, a new full diamond interchange at Lafayette Street and a realigned Clark Avenue. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve roadway capacity, traffic operations, and traffic safety. Structural engineering would reduce the opportunities for head-on crashes and add room for recovery or avoidance of obstacles. Access to MSP, Lincoln University, and Jefferson City High School would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Full build-out of the preferred alternative would: directly affect historic resources such as the Craftsman/Monastery district and the property of the Lincoln University President's House; acquire the Quinn Chapel AME church; alter access to several downtown businesses; fully acquire 25 residences and four business properties; and partially acquire 16 residences and four business properties. Right-of-way acquisition and construction would impact a minority population and take an historic district associated with the African American Foot neighborhood. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0138D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100483, draft EIS--180 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, December 29, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-09-03-F KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Prisons KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 401 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/16379619?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.title=WHITTON+EXPRESSWAY%2C+JEFFERSON+CITY%2C+COLE+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 29, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 55 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873128659; 14748-8_0055 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 55 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128659?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 54 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873128235; 14748-8_0054 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 54 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128235?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 39 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873127474; 14748-8_0039 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 39 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127474?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 24 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873127464; 14748-8_0024 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 24 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127464?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 38 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873127410; 14748-8_0038 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 38 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127410?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 37 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873127406; 14748-8_0037 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 37 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127406?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 36 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873127398; 14748-8_0036 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 36 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127398?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 34 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873127387; 14748-8_0034 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 34 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127387?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 33 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873127369; 14748-8_0033 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 33 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127369?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 32 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873127359; 14748-8_0032 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 32 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127359?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 29 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873127347; 14748-8_0029 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 29 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127347?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 43 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873127237; 14748-8_0043 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 43 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127237?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 42 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873127230; 14748-8_0042 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 42 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127230?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 41 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873127226; 14748-8_0041 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 41 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127226?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 40 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873127222; 14748-8_0040 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 40 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127222?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 25 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873127129; 14748-8_0025 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 25 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127129?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 14 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873127123; 14748-8_0014 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127123?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 13 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873127117; 14748-8_0013 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 13 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127117?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 12 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873127109; 14748-8_0012 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127109?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 11 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873127104; 14748-8_0011 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127104?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 10 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873127099; 14748-8_0010 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127099?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 53 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873126823; 14748-8_0053 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 53 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126823?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 52 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873126814; 14748-8_0052 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 52 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126814?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 51 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873126808; 14748-8_0051 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 51 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126808?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 49 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873126803; 14748-8_0049 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 49 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126803?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 48 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873126800; 14748-8_0048 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 48 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126800?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 47 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873126795; 14748-8_0047 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 47 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126795?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 46 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873126791; 14748-8_0046 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 46 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126791?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 50 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873126789; 14748-8_0050 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 50 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126789?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 45 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873126785; 14748-8_0045 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 45 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126785?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 44 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873126780; 14748-8_0044 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 44 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126780?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 31 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873126600; 14748-8_0031 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 31 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126600?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 30 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873126589; 14748-8_0030 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 30 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126589?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 28 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873126577; 14748-8_0028 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 28 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126577?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 27 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873126566; 14748-8_0027 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 27 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126566?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 26 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873126559; 14748-8_0026 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 26 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126559?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 9 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873126463; 14748-8_0009 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126463?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 8 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873126449; 14748-8_0008 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126449?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 35 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873126442; 14748-8_0035 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 35 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126442?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 7 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873126437; 14748-8_0007 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126437?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 6 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873126429; 14748-8_0006 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126429?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 1 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873126239; 14748-8_0001 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126239?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 5 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873126203; 14748-8_0005 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126203?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 4 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873126194; 14748-8_0004 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126194?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 23 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873126190; 14748-8_0023 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 23 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126190?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 3 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873126185; 14748-8_0003 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126185?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 22 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873126178; 14748-8_0022 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 22 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126178?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 2 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873126176; 14748-8_0002 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126176?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 21 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873126163; 14748-8_0021 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 21 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126163?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 20 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873126145; 14748-8_0020 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 20 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126145?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 18 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873126135; 14748-8_0018 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 18 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126135?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 19 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873126126; 14748-8_0019 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 19 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126126?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 17 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873126115; 14748-8_0017 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 17 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126115?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 16 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873126106; 14748-8_0016 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 16 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126106?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 15 of 55] T2 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 873126094; 14748-8_0015 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126094?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SUNRISE PROJECT: I-205 TO ROCK CREEK JUNCTION, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 16372567; 14748 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new, east-west oriented, limited-access highway between Interstate 205 (I-205) and Rock Creek Junction, Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The existing Oregon Highway 212/224 (OR 212/224) corridor, which forms the main east-west travel route between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction, has serious congestion and safety problems. Residential and business traffic is severely delayed during peak periods, with travel speeds as low as four miles per hour at several locations. The draft EIS of 1993 proposed increasing the capacity of OR 212/224 over a length of approximately 13 miles. A supplemental EIS published in October 2008 proposed a new highway, to be designated OR 212/224, which would provide for six through lanes, plus two auxiliary lanes. Existing OR 212/224 would be designated as a Clackamas County arterial. The proposed Sunrise Project would connect I-205, the Milwaukie Expressway (OR 224), SE 82nd Avenue/Drive, and OR 212/224. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered. The preferred alternative is Alternative 2 with the Tolbert overcrossing from design option A-2, and incorporates the alignment of design option C-2 and the single point urban interchange of design option D-3. Alternative 2 would provide a multi-lane, limited-access highway north of and parallel to existing OR 212/224 between I-205 and Rock Creek Junction. A midpoint interchange would connect the facility to the existing OR 212/214, ensuring access to businesses along that corridor. From I-205 to Rock Creek Junction, where OR 212/214 splits into OR 212 to the east and OR 224 to the south, the highway would feature six lanes plus auxiliary lanes. East of Rock Creek Junction, the highway would narrow to six lanes with no auxiliary lanes to Southeast 172nd Avenue, where it would narrow to five lanes. Construction is planned to begin in 2013 and total project costs for the preferred alternative are estimated at $1.49 billion in 2013 dollars, of which $216 million is for right-of-way acquisition. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow, capacity, safety conditions, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. New and more frequent local transit service would be possible along the project highway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would displace 514 acres of land, requiring the relocation of 80 businesses and 53 residences and the displacement of 0.18 acre of the recreation field at the Clackamas Elementary School. Numerous utilities would be affected and require relocation at a cost of $7.7 million to $28 million. Construction would remove 94 acres of wildlife habitat and 23 acres of wetlands and 113.3 acres of new impervious surface would be created. Traffic-generated noise would exceed criteria at 416 receptor sites; construction of noise abatement walls could reduce the number to 241 sites. Visual quality of the corridor would decline. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 08-0471D, Volume 32, Number 4. For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 93-0279D, Volume 17, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100478, Final EIS--456 pages and maps, Appendices--DVD, December 17, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-02-F KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/16372567?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SUNRISE+PROJECT%3A+I-205+TO+ROCK+CREEK+JUNCTION%2C+CLACKAMAS+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 21 of 22] T2 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 873127384; 14740-0_0021 AB - PURPOSE: The completion of the consolidation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Headquarters offices at St. Elizabeths in Southeast Washington, District of Columbia by amending the 2008 Master Plan to construct and operate just over one million gross square feet (gsf) of development within the 32-acre East Campus North Parcel site is proposed. DHS previously identified the need to provide 4.5 million gross square feet (gsf) of secure office space, plus parking, for its consolidated Headquarters and concluded that St. Elizabeths, a National Historic Landmark and former government-run hospital for the insane, was the most viable site for this consolidation. The original plan to use only the West Campus triggered concerns about the density of development that would occur. After discussions with the District of Columbia, a November 2008 Final EIS on the St. Elizabeths Campus Master Plan for the Consolidated Headquarters of the DHS assessed an alternative that would place development on both campuses. The subsequent Record of Decision selected the alternative that would consolidate 3.8 million gsf of secure office and shared-use space on the St. Elizabeths West Campus and assessed the impacts of constructing 750,000 gsf of office space, plus associated parking, on the St. Elizabeths East Campus at a programmatic level. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this Master Plan Amendment draft EIS analyzes three action alternatives for the East Campus North Parcel: Alternative A (East West Bars), Alternative B (Campus Reflection), and Alternative C (Atrium). In addition, the General Services Administration (GSA) is reevaluating transportation improvements required for the DHS consolidation that were considered in the 2008 Final Master Plan EIS. Two alternatives (1 and 2) for the Interstate 295/Malcolm X Avenue interchange and proposed West Campus Access Road, Firth Sterling Avenue/West Campus Access Road intersection, widening of Martin Luther King Jr. (MLK) Avenue, and needed transportation improvements to support the East Campus development are considered. The headquarters of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), a DHS component agency, would be located on the North Parcel to house 3,089 FEMA headquarters staff. Occupation would occur by 2014. The new DHS/FEMA headquarters buildings would likely be five to seven stories above the current ground surface on the western side of the North Parcel. Development of the North Parcel would also include: a parking garage for approximately 775 vehicles; sidewalks and surface parking; a tunnel under MLK Avenue linking the East and West Campuses; a secure perimeter fence; VIP access and parking; shipping/receiving dock; shuttle bus hub; electric power, communications, and other utility corridors; realignment of site drainages and landscaping; and transportation improvements to support East Campus North Parcel development. Existing structures would be retained, relocated, or demolished. The Dix Pavilion would be demolished to prepare the site for the FEMA facility. The existing Veterans Shelter would be demolished and its operations would be relocated. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Completion of the consolidation of DHS Headquarters activities with a highly advantageous location, would help ensure the economic and operational efficiency and effectiveness of operations aimed at dealing with catastrophes and terrorist operations. Now disparate agencies and offices within agencies would be gathered into one well coordinated built-to-purpose facility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Clearing, grading, and removal of vegetation would cause erosion, introduction of pollutants into surface water, and long-term impacts on landscapes and historic buildings. Archaeological resource sites would also be disturbed or destroyed. New construction at both the campus and the interchange site would disturb wetlands and alter groundwater hydrology and quality. Long-term adverse impacts to transportation would occur. LEGAL MANDATES: National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100470, Draft EIS (Volume I)--636 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--626 pages, December 10, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 21 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Buildings KW - Demolition KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Hospitals KW - Municipal Services KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Site Planning KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - District of Columbia KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127384?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - General Services Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; GSA N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 10, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 20 of 22] T2 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 873127379; 14740-0_0020 AB - PURPOSE: The completion of the consolidation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Headquarters offices at St. Elizabeths in Southeast Washington, District of Columbia by amending the 2008 Master Plan to construct and operate just over one million gross square feet (gsf) of development within the 32-acre East Campus North Parcel site is proposed. DHS previously identified the need to provide 4.5 million gross square feet (gsf) of secure office space, plus parking, for its consolidated Headquarters and concluded that St. Elizabeths, a National Historic Landmark and former government-run hospital for the insane, was the most viable site for this consolidation. The original plan to use only the West Campus triggered concerns about the density of development that would occur. After discussions with the District of Columbia, a November 2008 Final EIS on the St. Elizabeths Campus Master Plan for the Consolidated Headquarters of the DHS assessed an alternative that would place development on both campuses. The subsequent Record of Decision selected the alternative that would consolidate 3.8 million gsf of secure office and shared-use space on the St. Elizabeths West Campus and assessed the impacts of constructing 750,000 gsf of office space, plus associated parking, on the St. Elizabeths East Campus at a programmatic level. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this Master Plan Amendment draft EIS analyzes three action alternatives for the East Campus North Parcel: Alternative A (East West Bars), Alternative B (Campus Reflection), and Alternative C (Atrium). In addition, the General Services Administration (GSA) is reevaluating transportation improvements required for the DHS consolidation that were considered in the 2008 Final Master Plan EIS. Two alternatives (1 and 2) for the Interstate 295/Malcolm X Avenue interchange and proposed West Campus Access Road, Firth Sterling Avenue/West Campus Access Road intersection, widening of Martin Luther King Jr. (MLK) Avenue, and needed transportation improvements to support the East Campus development are considered. The headquarters of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), a DHS component agency, would be located on the North Parcel to house 3,089 FEMA headquarters staff. Occupation would occur by 2014. The new DHS/FEMA headquarters buildings would likely be five to seven stories above the current ground surface on the western side of the North Parcel. Development of the North Parcel would also include: a parking garage for approximately 775 vehicles; sidewalks and surface parking; a tunnel under MLK Avenue linking the East and West Campuses; a secure perimeter fence; VIP access and parking; shipping/receiving dock; shuttle bus hub; electric power, communications, and other utility corridors; realignment of site drainages and landscaping; and transportation improvements to support East Campus North Parcel development. Existing structures would be retained, relocated, or demolished. The Dix Pavilion would be demolished to prepare the site for the FEMA facility. The existing Veterans Shelter would be demolished and its operations would be relocated. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Completion of the consolidation of DHS Headquarters activities with a highly advantageous location, would help ensure the economic and operational efficiency and effectiveness of operations aimed at dealing with catastrophes and terrorist operations. Now disparate agencies and offices within agencies would be gathered into one well coordinated built-to-purpose facility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Clearing, grading, and removal of vegetation would cause erosion, introduction of pollutants into surface water, and long-term impacts on landscapes and historic buildings. Archaeological resource sites would also be disturbed or destroyed. New construction at both the campus and the interchange site would disturb wetlands and alter groundwater hydrology and quality. Long-term adverse impacts to transportation would occur. LEGAL MANDATES: National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100470, Draft EIS (Volume I)--636 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--626 pages, December 10, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 20 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Buildings KW - Demolition KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Hospitals KW - Municipal Services KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Site Planning KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - District of Columbia KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127379?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - General Services Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; GSA N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 10, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 19 of 22] T2 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 873127375; 14740-0_0019 AB - PURPOSE: The completion of the consolidation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Headquarters offices at St. Elizabeths in Southeast Washington, District of Columbia by amending the 2008 Master Plan to construct and operate just over one million gross square feet (gsf) of development within the 32-acre East Campus North Parcel site is proposed. DHS previously identified the need to provide 4.5 million gross square feet (gsf) of secure office space, plus parking, for its consolidated Headquarters and concluded that St. Elizabeths, a National Historic Landmark and former government-run hospital for the insane, was the most viable site for this consolidation. The original plan to use only the West Campus triggered concerns about the density of development that would occur. After discussions with the District of Columbia, a November 2008 Final EIS on the St. Elizabeths Campus Master Plan for the Consolidated Headquarters of the DHS assessed an alternative that would place development on both campuses. The subsequent Record of Decision selected the alternative that would consolidate 3.8 million gsf of secure office and shared-use space on the St. Elizabeths West Campus and assessed the impacts of constructing 750,000 gsf of office space, plus associated parking, on the St. Elizabeths East Campus at a programmatic level. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this Master Plan Amendment draft EIS analyzes three action alternatives for the East Campus North Parcel: Alternative A (East West Bars), Alternative B (Campus Reflection), and Alternative C (Atrium). In addition, the General Services Administration (GSA) is reevaluating transportation improvements required for the DHS consolidation that were considered in the 2008 Final Master Plan EIS. Two alternatives (1 and 2) for the Interstate 295/Malcolm X Avenue interchange and proposed West Campus Access Road, Firth Sterling Avenue/West Campus Access Road intersection, widening of Martin Luther King Jr. (MLK) Avenue, and needed transportation improvements to support the East Campus development are considered. The headquarters of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), a DHS component agency, would be located on the North Parcel to house 3,089 FEMA headquarters staff. Occupation would occur by 2014. The new DHS/FEMA headquarters buildings would likely be five to seven stories above the current ground surface on the western side of the North Parcel. Development of the North Parcel would also include: a parking garage for approximately 775 vehicles; sidewalks and surface parking; a tunnel under MLK Avenue linking the East and West Campuses; a secure perimeter fence; VIP access and parking; shipping/receiving dock; shuttle bus hub; electric power, communications, and other utility corridors; realignment of site drainages and landscaping; and transportation improvements to support East Campus North Parcel development. Existing structures would be retained, relocated, or demolished. The Dix Pavilion would be demolished to prepare the site for the FEMA facility. The existing Veterans Shelter would be demolished and its operations would be relocated. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Completion of the consolidation of DHS Headquarters activities with a highly advantageous location, would help ensure the economic and operational efficiency and effectiveness of operations aimed at dealing with catastrophes and terrorist operations. Now disparate agencies and offices within agencies would be gathered into one well coordinated built-to-purpose facility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Clearing, grading, and removal of vegetation would cause erosion, introduction of pollutants into surface water, and long-term impacts on landscapes and historic buildings. Archaeological resource sites would also be disturbed or destroyed. New construction at both the campus and the interchange site would disturb wetlands and alter groundwater hydrology and quality. Long-term adverse impacts to transportation would occur. LEGAL MANDATES: National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100470, Draft EIS (Volume I)--636 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--626 pages, December 10, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 19 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Buildings KW - Demolition KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Hospitals KW - Municipal Services KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Site Planning KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - District of Columbia KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127375?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - General Services Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; GSA N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 10, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 18 of 22] T2 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 873127372; 14740-0_0018 AB - PURPOSE: The completion of the consolidation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Headquarters offices at St. Elizabeths in Southeast Washington, District of Columbia by amending the 2008 Master Plan to construct and operate just over one million gross square feet (gsf) of development within the 32-acre East Campus North Parcel site is proposed. DHS previously identified the need to provide 4.5 million gross square feet (gsf) of secure office space, plus parking, for its consolidated Headquarters and concluded that St. Elizabeths, a National Historic Landmark and former government-run hospital for the insane, was the most viable site for this consolidation. The original plan to use only the West Campus triggered concerns about the density of development that would occur. After discussions with the District of Columbia, a November 2008 Final EIS on the St. Elizabeths Campus Master Plan for the Consolidated Headquarters of the DHS assessed an alternative that would place development on both campuses. The subsequent Record of Decision selected the alternative that would consolidate 3.8 million gsf of secure office and shared-use space on the St. Elizabeths West Campus and assessed the impacts of constructing 750,000 gsf of office space, plus associated parking, on the St. Elizabeths East Campus at a programmatic level. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this Master Plan Amendment draft EIS analyzes three action alternatives for the East Campus North Parcel: Alternative A (East West Bars), Alternative B (Campus Reflection), and Alternative C (Atrium). In addition, the General Services Administration (GSA) is reevaluating transportation improvements required for the DHS consolidation that were considered in the 2008 Final Master Plan EIS. Two alternatives (1 and 2) for the Interstate 295/Malcolm X Avenue interchange and proposed West Campus Access Road, Firth Sterling Avenue/West Campus Access Road intersection, widening of Martin Luther King Jr. (MLK) Avenue, and needed transportation improvements to support the East Campus development are considered. The headquarters of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), a DHS component agency, would be located on the North Parcel to house 3,089 FEMA headquarters staff. Occupation would occur by 2014. The new DHS/FEMA headquarters buildings would likely be five to seven stories above the current ground surface on the western side of the North Parcel. Development of the North Parcel would also include: a parking garage for approximately 775 vehicles; sidewalks and surface parking; a tunnel under MLK Avenue linking the East and West Campuses; a secure perimeter fence; VIP access and parking; shipping/receiving dock; shuttle bus hub; electric power, communications, and other utility corridors; realignment of site drainages and landscaping; and transportation improvements to support East Campus North Parcel development. Existing structures would be retained, relocated, or demolished. The Dix Pavilion would be demolished to prepare the site for the FEMA facility. The existing Veterans Shelter would be demolished and its operations would be relocated. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Completion of the consolidation of DHS Headquarters activities with a highly advantageous location, would help ensure the economic and operational efficiency and effectiveness of operations aimed at dealing with catastrophes and terrorist operations. Now disparate agencies and offices within agencies would be gathered into one well coordinated built-to-purpose facility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Clearing, grading, and removal of vegetation would cause erosion, introduction of pollutants into surface water, and long-term impacts on landscapes and historic buildings. Archaeological resource sites would also be disturbed or destroyed. New construction at both the campus and the interchange site would disturb wetlands and alter groundwater hydrology and quality. Long-term adverse impacts to transportation would occur. LEGAL MANDATES: National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100470, Draft EIS (Volume I)--636 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--626 pages, December 10, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 18 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Buildings KW - Demolition KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Hospitals KW - Municipal Services KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Site Planning KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - District of Columbia KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127372?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - General Services Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; GSA N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 10, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 17 of 22] T2 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 873127366; 14740-0_0017 AB - PURPOSE: The completion of the consolidation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Headquarters offices at St. Elizabeths in Southeast Washington, District of Columbia by amending the 2008 Master Plan to construct and operate just over one million gross square feet (gsf) of development within the 32-acre East Campus North Parcel site is proposed. DHS previously identified the need to provide 4.5 million gross square feet (gsf) of secure office space, plus parking, for its consolidated Headquarters and concluded that St. Elizabeths, a National Historic Landmark and former government-run hospital for the insane, was the most viable site for this consolidation. The original plan to use only the West Campus triggered concerns about the density of development that would occur. After discussions with the District of Columbia, a November 2008 Final EIS on the St. Elizabeths Campus Master Plan for the Consolidated Headquarters of the DHS assessed an alternative that would place development on both campuses. The subsequent Record of Decision selected the alternative that would consolidate 3.8 million gsf of secure office and shared-use space on the St. Elizabeths West Campus and assessed the impacts of constructing 750,000 gsf of office space, plus associated parking, on the St. Elizabeths East Campus at a programmatic level. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this Master Plan Amendment draft EIS analyzes three action alternatives for the East Campus North Parcel: Alternative A (East West Bars), Alternative B (Campus Reflection), and Alternative C (Atrium). In addition, the General Services Administration (GSA) is reevaluating transportation improvements required for the DHS consolidation that were considered in the 2008 Final Master Plan EIS. Two alternatives (1 and 2) for the Interstate 295/Malcolm X Avenue interchange and proposed West Campus Access Road, Firth Sterling Avenue/West Campus Access Road intersection, widening of Martin Luther King Jr. (MLK) Avenue, and needed transportation improvements to support the East Campus development are considered. The headquarters of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), a DHS component agency, would be located on the North Parcel to house 3,089 FEMA headquarters staff. Occupation would occur by 2014. The new DHS/FEMA headquarters buildings would likely be five to seven stories above the current ground surface on the western side of the North Parcel. Development of the North Parcel would also include: a parking garage for approximately 775 vehicles; sidewalks and surface parking; a tunnel under MLK Avenue linking the East and West Campuses; a secure perimeter fence; VIP access and parking; shipping/receiving dock; shuttle bus hub; electric power, communications, and other utility corridors; realignment of site drainages and landscaping; and transportation improvements to support East Campus North Parcel development. Existing structures would be retained, relocated, or demolished. The Dix Pavilion would be demolished to prepare the site for the FEMA facility. The existing Veterans Shelter would be demolished and its operations would be relocated. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Completion of the consolidation of DHS Headquarters activities with a highly advantageous location, would help ensure the economic and operational efficiency and effectiveness of operations aimed at dealing with catastrophes and terrorist operations. Now disparate agencies and offices within agencies would be gathered into one well coordinated built-to-purpose facility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Clearing, grading, and removal of vegetation would cause erosion, introduction of pollutants into surface water, and long-term impacts on landscapes and historic buildings. Archaeological resource sites would also be disturbed or destroyed. New construction at both the campus and the interchange site would disturb wetlands and alter groundwater hydrology and quality. Long-term adverse impacts to transportation would occur. LEGAL MANDATES: National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100470, Draft EIS (Volume I)--636 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--626 pages, December 10, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 17 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Buildings KW - Demolition KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Hospitals KW - Municipal Services KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Site Planning KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - District of Columbia KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127366?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - General Services Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; GSA N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 10, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 11 of 22] T2 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 873127360; 14740-0_0011 AB - PURPOSE: The completion of the consolidation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Headquarters offices at St. Elizabeths in Southeast Washington, District of Columbia by amending the 2008 Master Plan to construct and operate just over one million gross square feet (gsf) of development within the 32-acre East Campus North Parcel site is proposed. DHS previously identified the need to provide 4.5 million gross square feet (gsf) of secure office space, plus parking, for its consolidated Headquarters and concluded that St. Elizabeths, a National Historic Landmark and former government-run hospital for the insane, was the most viable site for this consolidation. The original plan to use only the West Campus triggered concerns about the density of development that would occur. After discussions with the District of Columbia, a November 2008 Final EIS on the St. Elizabeths Campus Master Plan for the Consolidated Headquarters of the DHS assessed an alternative that would place development on both campuses. The subsequent Record of Decision selected the alternative that would consolidate 3.8 million gsf of secure office and shared-use space on the St. Elizabeths West Campus and assessed the impacts of constructing 750,000 gsf of office space, plus associated parking, on the St. Elizabeths East Campus at a programmatic level. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this Master Plan Amendment draft EIS analyzes three action alternatives for the East Campus North Parcel: Alternative A (East West Bars), Alternative B (Campus Reflection), and Alternative C (Atrium). In addition, the General Services Administration (GSA) is reevaluating transportation improvements required for the DHS consolidation that were considered in the 2008 Final Master Plan EIS. Two alternatives (1 and 2) for the Interstate 295/Malcolm X Avenue interchange and proposed West Campus Access Road, Firth Sterling Avenue/West Campus Access Road intersection, widening of Martin Luther King Jr. (MLK) Avenue, and needed transportation improvements to support the East Campus development are considered. The headquarters of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), a DHS component agency, would be located on the North Parcel to house 3,089 FEMA headquarters staff. Occupation would occur by 2014. The new DHS/FEMA headquarters buildings would likely be five to seven stories above the current ground surface on the western side of the North Parcel. Development of the North Parcel would also include: a parking garage for approximately 775 vehicles; sidewalks and surface parking; a tunnel under MLK Avenue linking the East and West Campuses; a secure perimeter fence; VIP access and parking; shipping/receiving dock; shuttle bus hub; electric power, communications, and other utility corridors; realignment of site drainages and landscaping; and transportation improvements to support East Campus North Parcel development. Existing structures would be retained, relocated, or demolished. The Dix Pavilion would be demolished to prepare the site for the FEMA facility. The existing Veterans Shelter would be demolished and its operations would be relocated. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Completion of the consolidation of DHS Headquarters activities with a highly advantageous location, would help ensure the economic and operational efficiency and effectiveness of operations aimed at dealing with catastrophes and terrorist operations. Now disparate agencies and offices within agencies would be gathered into one well coordinated built-to-purpose facility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Clearing, grading, and removal of vegetation would cause erosion, introduction of pollutants into surface water, and long-term impacts on landscapes and historic buildings. Archaeological resource sites would also be disturbed or destroyed. New construction at both the campus and the interchange site would disturb wetlands and alter groundwater hydrology and quality. Long-term adverse impacts to transportation would occur. LEGAL MANDATES: National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100470, Draft EIS (Volume I)--636 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--626 pages, December 10, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 11 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Buildings KW - Demolition KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Hospitals KW - Municipal Services KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Site Planning KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - District of Columbia KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127360?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - General Services Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; GSA N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 10, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 10 of 22] T2 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 873127353; 14740-0_0010 AB - PURPOSE: The completion of the consolidation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Headquarters offices at St. Elizabeths in Southeast Washington, District of Columbia by amending the 2008 Master Plan to construct and operate just over one million gross square feet (gsf) of development within the 32-acre East Campus North Parcel site is proposed. DHS previously identified the need to provide 4.5 million gross square feet (gsf) of secure office space, plus parking, for its consolidated Headquarters and concluded that St. Elizabeths, a National Historic Landmark and former government-run hospital for the insane, was the most viable site for this consolidation. The original plan to use only the West Campus triggered concerns about the density of development that would occur. After discussions with the District of Columbia, a November 2008 Final EIS on the St. Elizabeths Campus Master Plan for the Consolidated Headquarters of the DHS assessed an alternative that would place development on both campuses. The subsequent Record of Decision selected the alternative that would consolidate 3.8 million gsf of secure office and shared-use space on the St. Elizabeths West Campus and assessed the impacts of constructing 750,000 gsf of office space, plus associated parking, on the St. Elizabeths East Campus at a programmatic level. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this Master Plan Amendment draft EIS analyzes three action alternatives for the East Campus North Parcel: Alternative A (East West Bars), Alternative B (Campus Reflection), and Alternative C (Atrium). In addition, the General Services Administration (GSA) is reevaluating transportation improvements required for the DHS consolidation that were considered in the 2008 Final Master Plan EIS. Two alternatives (1 and 2) for the Interstate 295/Malcolm X Avenue interchange and proposed West Campus Access Road, Firth Sterling Avenue/West Campus Access Road intersection, widening of Martin Luther King Jr. (MLK) Avenue, and needed transportation improvements to support the East Campus development are considered. The headquarters of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), a DHS component agency, would be located on the North Parcel to house 3,089 FEMA headquarters staff. Occupation would occur by 2014. The new DHS/FEMA headquarters buildings would likely be five to seven stories above the current ground surface on the western side of the North Parcel. Development of the North Parcel would also include: a parking garage for approximately 775 vehicles; sidewalks and surface parking; a tunnel under MLK Avenue linking the East and West Campuses; a secure perimeter fence; VIP access and parking; shipping/receiving dock; shuttle bus hub; electric power, communications, and other utility corridors; realignment of site drainages and landscaping; and transportation improvements to support East Campus North Parcel development. Existing structures would be retained, relocated, or demolished. The Dix Pavilion would be demolished to prepare the site for the FEMA facility. The existing Veterans Shelter would be demolished and its operations would be relocated. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Completion of the consolidation of DHS Headquarters activities with a highly advantageous location, would help ensure the economic and operational efficiency and effectiveness of operations aimed at dealing with catastrophes and terrorist operations. Now disparate agencies and offices within agencies would be gathered into one well coordinated built-to-purpose facility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Clearing, grading, and removal of vegetation would cause erosion, introduction of pollutants into surface water, and long-term impacts on landscapes and historic buildings. Archaeological resource sites would also be disturbed or destroyed. New construction at both the campus and the interchange site would disturb wetlands and alter groundwater hydrology and quality. Long-term adverse impacts to transportation would occur. LEGAL MANDATES: National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100470, Draft EIS (Volume I)--636 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--626 pages, December 10, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 10 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Buildings KW - Demolition KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Hospitals KW - Municipal Services KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Site Planning KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - District of Columbia KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127353?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - General Services Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; GSA N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 10, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 3 of 22] T2 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 873127351; 14740-0_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The completion of the consolidation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Headquarters offices at St. Elizabeths in Southeast Washington, District of Columbia by amending the 2008 Master Plan to construct and operate just over one million gross square feet (gsf) of development within the 32-acre East Campus North Parcel site is proposed. DHS previously identified the need to provide 4.5 million gross square feet (gsf) of secure office space, plus parking, for its consolidated Headquarters and concluded that St. Elizabeths, a National Historic Landmark and former government-run hospital for the insane, was the most viable site for this consolidation. The original plan to use only the West Campus triggered concerns about the density of development that would occur. After discussions with the District of Columbia, a November 2008 Final EIS on the St. Elizabeths Campus Master Plan for the Consolidated Headquarters of the DHS assessed an alternative that would place development on both campuses. The subsequent Record of Decision selected the alternative that would consolidate 3.8 million gsf of secure office and shared-use space on the St. Elizabeths West Campus and assessed the impacts of constructing 750,000 gsf of office space, plus associated parking, on the St. Elizabeths East Campus at a programmatic level. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this Master Plan Amendment draft EIS analyzes three action alternatives for the East Campus North Parcel: Alternative A (East West Bars), Alternative B (Campus Reflection), and Alternative C (Atrium). In addition, the General Services Administration (GSA) is reevaluating transportation improvements required for the DHS consolidation that were considered in the 2008 Final Master Plan EIS. Two alternatives (1 and 2) for the Interstate 295/Malcolm X Avenue interchange and proposed West Campus Access Road, Firth Sterling Avenue/West Campus Access Road intersection, widening of Martin Luther King Jr. (MLK) Avenue, and needed transportation improvements to support the East Campus development are considered. The headquarters of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), a DHS component agency, would be located on the North Parcel to house 3,089 FEMA headquarters staff. Occupation would occur by 2014. The new DHS/FEMA headquarters buildings would likely be five to seven stories above the current ground surface on the western side of the North Parcel. Development of the North Parcel would also include: a parking garage for approximately 775 vehicles; sidewalks and surface parking; a tunnel under MLK Avenue linking the East and West Campuses; a secure perimeter fence; VIP access and parking; shipping/receiving dock; shuttle bus hub; electric power, communications, and other utility corridors; realignment of site drainages and landscaping; and transportation improvements to support East Campus North Parcel development. Existing structures would be retained, relocated, or demolished. The Dix Pavilion would be demolished to prepare the site for the FEMA facility. The existing Veterans Shelter would be demolished and its operations would be relocated. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Completion of the consolidation of DHS Headquarters activities with a highly advantageous location, would help ensure the economic and operational efficiency and effectiveness of operations aimed at dealing with catastrophes and terrorist operations. Now disparate agencies and offices within agencies would be gathered into one well coordinated built-to-purpose facility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Clearing, grading, and removal of vegetation would cause erosion, introduction of pollutants into surface water, and long-term impacts on landscapes and historic buildings. Archaeological resource sites would also be disturbed or destroyed. New construction at both the campus and the interchange site would disturb wetlands and alter groundwater hydrology and quality. Long-term adverse impacts to transportation would occur. LEGAL MANDATES: National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100470, Draft EIS (Volume I)--636 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--626 pages, December 10, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Buildings KW - Demolition KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Hospitals KW - Municipal Services KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Site Planning KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - District of Columbia KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127351?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - General Services Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; GSA N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 10, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 2 of 22] T2 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 873127346; 14740-0_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The completion of the consolidation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Headquarters offices at St. Elizabeths in Southeast Washington, District of Columbia by amending the 2008 Master Plan to construct and operate just over one million gross square feet (gsf) of development within the 32-acre East Campus North Parcel site is proposed. DHS previously identified the need to provide 4.5 million gross square feet (gsf) of secure office space, plus parking, for its consolidated Headquarters and concluded that St. Elizabeths, a National Historic Landmark and former government-run hospital for the insane, was the most viable site for this consolidation. The original plan to use only the West Campus triggered concerns about the density of development that would occur. After discussions with the District of Columbia, a November 2008 Final EIS on the St. Elizabeths Campus Master Plan for the Consolidated Headquarters of the DHS assessed an alternative that would place development on both campuses. The subsequent Record of Decision selected the alternative that would consolidate 3.8 million gsf of secure office and shared-use space on the St. Elizabeths West Campus and assessed the impacts of constructing 750,000 gsf of office space, plus associated parking, on the St. Elizabeths East Campus at a programmatic level. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this Master Plan Amendment draft EIS analyzes three action alternatives for the East Campus North Parcel: Alternative A (East West Bars), Alternative B (Campus Reflection), and Alternative C (Atrium). In addition, the General Services Administration (GSA) is reevaluating transportation improvements required for the DHS consolidation that were considered in the 2008 Final Master Plan EIS. Two alternatives (1 and 2) for the Interstate 295/Malcolm X Avenue interchange and proposed West Campus Access Road, Firth Sterling Avenue/West Campus Access Road intersection, widening of Martin Luther King Jr. (MLK) Avenue, and needed transportation improvements to support the East Campus development are considered. The headquarters of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), a DHS component agency, would be located on the North Parcel to house 3,089 FEMA headquarters staff. Occupation would occur by 2014. The new DHS/FEMA headquarters buildings would likely be five to seven stories above the current ground surface on the western side of the North Parcel. Development of the North Parcel would also include: a parking garage for approximately 775 vehicles; sidewalks and surface parking; a tunnel under MLK Avenue linking the East and West Campuses; a secure perimeter fence; VIP access and parking; shipping/receiving dock; shuttle bus hub; electric power, communications, and other utility corridors; realignment of site drainages and landscaping; and transportation improvements to support East Campus North Parcel development. Existing structures would be retained, relocated, or demolished. The Dix Pavilion would be demolished to prepare the site for the FEMA facility. The existing Veterans Shelter would be demolished and its operations would be relocated. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Completion of the consolidation of DHS Headquarters activities with a highly advantageous location, would help ensure the economic and operational efficiency and effectiveness of operations aimed at dealing with catastrophes and terrorist operations. Now disparate agencies and offices within agencies would be gathered into one well coordinated built-to-purpose facility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Clearing, grading, and removal of vegetation would cause erosion, introduction of pollutants into surface water, and long-term impacts on landscapes and historic buildings. Archaeological resource sites would also be disturbed or destroyed. New construction at both the campus and the interchange site would disturb wetlands and alter groundwater hydrology and quality. Long-term adverse impacts to transportation would occur. LEGAL MANDATES: National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100470, Draft EIS (Volume I)--636 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--626 pages, December 10, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Buildings KW - Demolition KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Hospitals KW - Municipal Services KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Site Planning KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - District of Columbia KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127346?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - General Services Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; GSA N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 10, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 1 of 22] T2 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 873127340; 14740-0_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The completion of the consolidation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Headquarters offices at St. Elizabeths in Southeast Washington, District of Columbia by amending the 2008 Master Plan to construct and operate just over one million gross square feet (gsf) of development within the 32-acre East Campus North Parcel site is proposed. DHS previously identified the need to provide 4.5 million gross square feet (gsf) of secure office space, plus parking, for its consolidated Headquarters and concluded that St. Elizabeths, a National Historic Landmark and former government-run hospital for the insane, was the most viable site for this consolidation. The original plan to use only the West Campus triggered concerns about the density of development that would occur. After discussions with the District of Columbia, a November 2008 Final EIS on the St. Elizabeths Campus Master Plan for the Consolidated Headquarters of the DHS assessed an alternative that would place development on both campuses. The subsequent Record of Decision selected the alternative that would consolidate 3.8 million gsf of secure office and shared-use space on the St. Elizabeths West Campus and assessed the impacts of constructing 750,000 gsf of office space, plus associated parking, on the St. Elizabeths East Campus at a programmatic level. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this Master Plan Amendment draft EIS analyzes three action alternatives for the East Campus North Parcel: Alternative A (East West Bars), Alternative B (Campus Reflection), and Alternative C (Atrium). In addition, the General Services Administration (GSA) is reevaluating transportation improvements required for the DHS consolidation that were considered in the 2008 Final Master Plan EIS. Two alternatives (1 and 2) for the Interstate 295/Malcolm X Avenue interchange and proposed West Campus Access Road, Firth Sterling Avenue/West Campus Access Road intersection, widening of Martin Luther King Jr. (MLK) Avenue, and needed transportation improvements to support the East Campus development are considered. The headquarters of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), a DHS component agency, would be located on the North Parcel to house 3,089 FEMA headquarters staff. Occupation would occur by 2014. The new DHS/FEMA headquarters buildings would likely be five to seven stories above the current ground surface on the western side of the North Parcel. Development of the North Parcel would also include: a parking garage for approximately 775 vehicles; sidewalks and surface parking; a tunnel under MLK Avenue linking the East and West Campuses; a secure perimeter fence; VIP access and parking; shipping/receiving dock; shuttle bus hub; electric power, communications, and other utility corridors; realignment of site drainages and landscaping; and transportation improvements to support East Campus North Parcel development. Existing structures would be retained, relocated, or demolished. The Dix Pavilion would be demolished to prepare the site for the FEMA facility. The existing Veterans Shelter would be demolished and its operations would be relocated. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Completion of the consolidation of DHS Headquarters activities with a highly advantageous location, would help ensure the economic and operational efficiency and effectiveness of operations aimed at dealing with catastrophes and terrorist operations. Now disparate agencies and offices within agencies would be gathered into one well coordinated built-to-purpose facility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Clearing, grading, and removal of vegetation would cause erosion, introduction of pollutants into surface water, and long-term impacts on landscapes and historic buildings. Archaeological resource sites would also be disturbed or destroyed. New construction at both the campus and the interchange site would disturb wetlands and alter groundwater hydrology and quality. Long-term adverse impacts to transportation would occur. LEGAL MANDATES: National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100470, Draft EIS (Volume I)--636 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--626 pages, December 10, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Buildings KW - Demolition KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Hospitals KW - Municipal Services KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Site Planning KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - District of Columbia KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127340?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - General Services Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; GSA N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 10, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 12 of 22] T2 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 873127336; 14740-0_0012 AB - PURPOSE: The completion of the consolidation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Headquarters offices at St. Elizabeths in Southeast Washington, District of Columbia by amending the 2008 Master Plan to construct and operate just over one million gross square feet (gsf) of development within the 32-acre East Campus North Parcel site is proposed. DHS previously identified the need to provide 4.5 million gross square feet (gsf) of secure office space, plus parking, for its consolidated Headquarters and concluded that St. Elizabeths, a National Historic Landmark and former government-run hospital for the insane, was the most viable site for this consolidation. The original plan to use only the West Campus triggered concerns about the density of development that would occur. After discussions with the District of Columbia, a November 2008 Final EIS on the St. Elizabeths Campus Master Plan for the Consolidated Headquarters of the DHS assessed an alternative that would place development on both campuses. The subsequent Record of Decision selected the alternative that would consolidate 3.8 million gsf of secure office and shared-use space on the St. Elizabeths West Campus and assessed the impacts of constructing 750,000 gsf of office space, plus associated parking, on the St. Elizabeths East Campus at a programmatic level. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this Master Plan Amendment draft EIS analyzes three action alternatives for the East Campus North Parcel: Alternative A (East West Bars), Alternative B (Campus Reflection), and Alternative C (Atrium). In addition, the General Services Administration (GSA) is reevaluating transportation improvements required for the DHS consolidation that were considered in the 2008 Final Master Plan EIS. Two alternatives (1 and 2) for the Interstate 295/Malcolm X Avenue interchange and proposed West Campus Access Road, Firth Sterling Avenue/West Campus Access Road intersection, widening of Martin Luther King Jr. (MLK) Avenue, and needed transportation improvements to support the East Campus development are considered. The headquarters of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), a DHS component agency, would be located on the North Parcel to house 3,089 FEMA headquarters staff. Occupation would occur by 2014. The new DHS/FEMA headquarters buildings would likely be five to seven stories above the current ground surface on the western side of the North Parcel. Development of the North Parcel would also include: a parking garage for approximately 775 vehicles; sidewalks and surface parking; a tunnel under MLK Avenue linking the East and West Campuses; a secure perimeter fence; VIP access and parking; shipping/receiving dock; shuttle bus hub; electric power, communications, and other utility corridors; realignment of site drainages and landscaping; and transportation improvements to support East Campus North Parcel development. Existing structures would be retained, relocated, or demolished. The Dix Pavilion would be demolished to prepare the site for the FEMA facility. The existing Veterans Shelter would be demolished and its operations would be relocated. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Completion of the consolidation of DHS Headquarters activities with a highly advantageous location, would help ensure the economic and operational efficiency and effectiveness of operations aimed at dealing with catastrophes and terrorist operations. Now disparate agencies and offices within agencies would be gathered into one well coordinated built-to-purpose facility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Clearing, grading, and removal of vegetation would cause erosion, introduction of pollutants into surface water, and long-term impacts on landscapes and historic buildings. Archaeological resource sites would also be disturbed or destroyed. New construction at both the campus and the interchange site would disturb wetlands and alter groundwater hydrology and quality. Long-term adverse impacts to transportation would occur. LEGAL MANDATES: National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100470, Draft EIS (Volume I)--636 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--626 pages, December 10, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 12 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Buildings KW - Demolition KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Hospitals KW - Municipal Services KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Site Planning KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - District of Columbia KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127336?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - General Services Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; GSA N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 10, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 5 of 22] T2 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 873127324; 14740-0_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The completion of the consolidation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Headquarters offices at St. Elizabeths in Southeast Washington, District of Columbia by amending the 2008 Master Plan to construct and operate just over one million gross square feet (gsf) of development within the 32-acre East Campus North Parcel site is proposed. DHS previously identified the need to provide 4.5 million gross square feet (gsf) of secure office space, plus parking, for its consolidated Headquarters and concluded that St. Elizabeths, a National Historic Landmark and former government-run hospital for the insane, was the most viable site for this consolidation. The original plan to use only the West Campus triggered concerns about the density of development that would occur. After discussions with the District of Columbia, a November 2008 Final EIS on the St. Elizabeths Campus Master Plan for the Consolidated Headquarters of the DHS assessed an alternative that would place development on both campuses. The subsequent Record of Decision selected the alternative that would consolidate 3.8 million gsf of secure office and shared-use space on the St. Elizabeths West Campus and assessed the impacts of constructing 750,000 gsf of office space, plus associated parking, on the St. Elizabeths East Campus at a programmatic level. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this Master Plan Amendment draft EIS analyzes three action alternatives for the East Campus North Parcel: Alternative A (East West Bars), Alternative B (Campus Reflection), and Alternative C (Atrium). In addition, the General Services Administration (GSA) is reevaluating transportation improvements required for the DHS consolidation that were considered in the 2008 Final Master Plan EIS. Two alternatives (1 and 2) for the Interstate 295/Malcolm X Avenue interchange and proposed West Campus Access Road, Firth Sterling Avenue/West Campus Access Road intersection, widening of Martin Luther King Jr. (MLK) Avenue, and needed transportation improvements to support the East Campus development are considered. The headquarters of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), a DHS component agency, would be located on the North Parcel to house 3,089 FEMA headquarters staff. Occupation would occur by 2014. The new DHS/FEMA headquarters buildings would likely be five to seven stories above the current ground surface on the western side of the North Parcel. Development of the North Parcel would also include: a parking garage for approximately 775 vehicles; sidewalks and surface parking; a tunnel under MLK Avenue linking the East and West Campuses; a secure perimeter fence; VIP access and parking; shipping/receiving dock; shuttle bus hub; electric power, communications, and other utility corridors; realignment of site drainages and landscaping; and transportation improvements to support East Campus North Parcel development. Existing structures would be retained, relocated, or demolished. The Dix Pavilion would be demolished to prepare the site for the FEMA facility. The existing Veterans Shelter would be demolished and its operations would be relocated. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Completion of the consolidation of DHS Headquarters activities with a highly advantageous location, would help ensure the economic and operational efficiency and effectiveness of operations aimed at dealing with catastrophes and terrorist operations. Now disparate agencies and offices within agencies would be gathered into one well coordinated built-to-purpose facility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Clearing, grading, and removal of vegetation would cause erosion, introduction of pollutants into surface water, and long-term impacts on landscapes and historic buildings. Archaeological resource sites would also be disturbed or destroyed. New construction at both the campus and the interchange site would disturb wetlands and alter groundwater hydrology and quality. Long-term adverse impacts to transportation would occur. LEGAL MANDATES: National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100470, Draft EIS (Volume I)--636 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--626 pages, December 10, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Buildings KW - Demolition KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Hospitals KW - Municipal Services KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Site Planning KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - District of Columbia KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127324?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - General Services Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; GSA N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 10, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 4 of 22] T2 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 873127312; 14740-0_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The completion of the consolidation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Headquarters offices at St. Elizabeths in Southeast Washington, District of Columbia by amending the 2008 Master Plan to construct and operate just over one million gross square feet (gsf) of development within the 32-acre East Campus North Parcel site is proposed. DHS previously identified the need to provide 4.5 million gross square feet (gsf) of secure office space, plus parking, for its consolidated Headquarters and concluded that St. Elizabeths, a National Historic Landmark and former government-run hospital for the insane, was the most viable site for this consolidation. The original plan to use only the West Campus triggered concerns about the density of development that would occur. After discussions with the District of Columbia, a November 2008 Final EIS on the St. Elizabeths Campus Master Plan for the Consolidated Headquarters of the DHS assessed an alternative that would place development on both campuses. The subsequent Record of Decision selected the alternative that would consolidate 3.8 million gsf of secure office and shared-use space on the St. Elizabeths West Campus and assessed the impacts of constructing 750,000 gsf of office space, plus associated parking, on the St. Elizabeths East Campus at a programmatic level. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this Master Plan Amendment draft EIS analyzes three action alternatives for the East Campus North Parcel: Alternative A (East West Bars), Alternative B (Campus Reflection), and Alternative C (Atrium). In addition, the General Services Administration (GSA) is reevaluating transportation improvements required for the DHS consolidation that were considered in the 2008 Final Master Plan EIS. Two alternatives (1 and 2) for the Interstate 295/Malcolm X Avenue interchange and proposed West Campus Access Road, Firth Sterling Avenue/West Campus Access Road intersection, widening of Martin Luther King Jr. (MLK) Avenue, and needed transportation improvements to support the East Campus development are considered. The headquarters of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), a DHS component agency, would be located on the North Parcel to house 3,089 FEMA headquarters staff. Occupation would occur by 2014. The new DHS/FEMA headquarters buildings would likely be five to seven stories above the current ground surface on the western side of the North Parcel. Development of the North Parcel would also include: a parking garage for approximately 775 vehicles; sidewalks and surface parking; a tunnel under MLK Avenue linking the East and West Campuses; a secure perimeter fence; VIP access and parking; shipping/receiving dock; shuttle bus hub; electric power, communications, and other utility corridors; realignment of site drainages and landscaping; and transportation improvements to support East Campus North Parcel development. Existing structures would be retained, relocated, or demolished. The Dix Pavilion would be demolished to prepare the site for the FEMA facility. The existing Veterans Shelter would be demolished and its operations would be relocated. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Completion of the consolidation of DHS Headquarters activities with a highly advantageous location, would help ensure the economic and operational efficiency and effectiveness of operations aimed at dealing with catastrophes and terrorist operations. Now disparate agencies and offices within agencies would be gathered into one well coordinated built-to-purpose facility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Clearing, grading, and removal of vegetation would cause erosion, introduction of pollutants into surface water, and long-term impacts on landscapes and historic buildings. Archaeological resource sites would also be disturbed or destroyed. New construction at both the campus and the interchange site would disturb wetlands and alter groundwater hydrology and quality. Long-term adverse impacts to transportation would occur. LEGAL MANDATES: National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100470, Draft EIS (Volume I)--636 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--626 pages, December 10, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Buildings KW - Demolition KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Hospitals KW - Municipal Services KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Site Planning KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - District of Columbia KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127312?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - General Services Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; GSA N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 10, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 22 of 22] T2 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 873127236; 14740-0_0022 AB - PURPOSE: The completion of the consolidation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Headquarters offices at St. Elizabeths in Southeast Washington, District of Columbia by amending the 2008 Master Plan to construct and operate just over one million gross square feet (gsf) of development within the 32-acre East Campus North Parcel site is proposed. DHS previously identified the need to provide 4.5 million gross square feet (gsf) of secure office space, plus parking, for its consolidated Headquarters and concluded that St. Elizabeths, a National Historic Landmark and former government-run hospital for the insane, was the most viable site for this consolidation. The original plan to use only the West Campus triggered concerns about the density of development that would occur. After discussions with the District of Columbia, a November 2008 Final EIS on the St. Elizabeths Campus Master Plan for the Consolidated Headquarters of the DHS assessed an alternative that would place development on both campuses. The subsequent Record of Decision selected the alternative that would consolidate 3.8 million gsf of secure office and shared-use space on the St. Elizabeths West Campus and assessed the impacts of constructing 750,000 gsf of office space, plus associated parking, on the St. Elizabeths East Campus at a programmatic level. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this Master Plan Amendment draft EIS analyzes three action alternatives for the East Campus North Parcel: Alternative A (East West Bars), Alternative B (Campus Reflection), and Alternative C (Atrium). In addition, the General Services Administration (GSA) is reevaluating transportation improvements required for the DHS consolidation that were considered in the 2008 Final Master Plan EIS. Two alternatives (1 and 2) for the Interstate 295/Malcolm X Avenue interchange and proposed West Campus Access Road, Firth Sterling Avenue/West Campus Access Road intersection, widening of Martin Luther King Jr. (MLK) Avenue, and needed transportation improvements to support the East Campus development are considered. The headquarters of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), a DHS component agency, would be located on the North Parcel to house 3,089 FEMA headquarters staff. Occupation would occur by 2014. The new DHS/FEMA headquarters buildings would likely be five to seven stories above the current ground surface on the western side of the North Parcel. Development of the North Parcel would also include: a parking garage for approximately 775 vehicles; sidewalks and surface parking; a tunnel under MLK Avenue linking the East and West Campuses; a secure perimeter fence; VIP access and parking; shipping/receiving dock; shuttle bus hub; electric power, communications, and other utility corridors; realignment of site drainages and landscaping; and transportation improvements to support East Campus North Parcel development. Existing structures would be retained, relocated, or demolished. The Dix Pavilion would be demolished to prepare the site for the FEMA facility. The existing Veterans Shelter would be demolished and its operations would be relocated. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Completion of the consolidation of DHS Headquarters activities with a highly advantageous location, would help ensure the economic and operational efficiency and effectiveness of operations aimed at dealing with catastrophes and terrorist operations. Now disparate agencies and offices within agencies would be gathered into one well coordinated built-to-purpose facility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Clearing, grading, and removal of vegetation would cause erosion, introduction of pollutants into surface water, and long-term impacts on landscapes and historic buildings. Archaeological resource sites would also be disturbed or destroyed. New construction at both the campus and the interchange site would disturb wetlands and alter groundwater hydrology and quality. Long-term adverse impacts to transportation would occur. LEGAL MANDATES: National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100470, Draft EIS (Volume I)--636 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--626 pages, December 10, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 22 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Buildings KW - Demolition KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Hospitals KW - Municipal Services KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Site Planning KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - District of Columbia KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127236?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - General Services Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; GSA N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 10, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 16 of 22] T2 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 873127218; 14740-0_0016 AB - PURPOSE: The completion of the consolidation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Headquarters offices at St. Elizabeths in Southeast Washington, District of Columbia by amending the 2008 Master Plan to construct and operate just over one million gross square feet (gsf) of development within the 32-acre East Campus North Parcel site is proposed. DHS previously identified the need to provide 4.5 million gross square feet (gsf) of secure office space, plus parking, for its consolidated Headquarters and concluded that St. Elizabeths, a National Historic Landmark and former government-run hospital for the insane, was the most viable site for this consolidation. The original plan to use only the West Campus triggered concerns about the density of development that would occur. After discussions with the District of Columbia, a November 2008 Final EIS on the St. Elizabeths Campus Master Plan for the Consolidated Headquarters of the DHS assessed an alternative that would place development on both campuses. The subsequent Record of Decision selected the alternative that would consolidate 3.8 million gsf of secure office and shared-use space on the St. Elizabeths West Campus and assessed the impacts of constructing 750,000 gsf of office space, plus associated parking, on the St. Elizabeths East Campus at a programmatic level. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this Master Plan Amendment draft EIS analyzes three action alternatives for the East Campus North Parcel: Alternative A (East West Bars), Alternative B (Campus Reflection), and Alternative C (Atrium). In addition, the General Services Administration (GSA) is reevaluating transportation improvements required for the DHS consolidation that were considered in the 2008 Final Master Plan EIS. Two alternatives (1 and 2) for the Interstate 295/Malcolm X Avenue interchange and proposed West Campus Access Road, Firth Sterling Avenue/West Campus Access Road intersection, widening of Martin Luther King Jr. (MLK) Avenue, and needed transportation improvements to support the East Campus development are considered. The headquarters of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), a DHS component agency, would be located on the North Parcel to house 3,089 FEMA headquarters staff. Occupation would occur by 2014. The new DHS/FEMA headquarters buildings would likely be five to seven stories above the current ground surface on the western side of the North Parcel. Development of the North Parcel would also include: a parking garage for approximately 775 vehicles; sidewalks and surface parking; a tunnel under MLK Avenue linking the East and West Campuses; a secure perimeter fence; VIP access and parking; shipping/receiving dock; shuttle bus hub; electric power, communications, and other utility corridors; realignment of site drainages and landscaping; and transportation improvements to support East Campus North Parcel development. Existing structures would be retained, relocated, or demolished. The Dix Pavilion would be demolished to prepare the site for the FEMA facility. The existing Veterans Shelter would be demolished and its operations would be relocated. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Completion of the consolidation of DHS Headquarters activities with a highly advantageous location, would help ensure the economic and operational efficiency and effectiveness of operations aimed at dealing with catastrophes and terrorist operations. Now disparate agencies and offices within agencies would be gathered into one well coordinated built-to-purpose facility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Clearing, grading, and removal of vegetation would cause erosion, introduction of pollutants into surface water, and long-term impacts on landscapes and historic buildings. Archaeological resource sites would also be disturbed or destroyed. New construction at both the campus and the interchange site would disturb wetlands and alter groundwater hydrology and quality. Long-term adverse impacts to transportation would occur. LEGAL MANDATES: National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100470, Draft EIS (Volume I)--636 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--626 pages, December 10, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 16 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Buildings KW - Demolition KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Hospitals KW - Municipal Services KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Site Planning KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - District of Columbia KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127218?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - General Services Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; GSA N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 10, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 15 of 22] T2 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 873127210; 14740-0_0015 AB - PURPOSE: The completion of the consolidation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Headquarters offices at St. Elizabeths in Southeast Washington, District of Columbia by amending the 2008 Master Plan to construct and operate just over one million gross square feet (gsf) of development within the 32-acre East Campus North Parcel site is proposed. DHS previously identified the need to provide 4.5 million gross square feet (gsf) of secure office space, plus parking, for its consolidated Headquarters and concluded that St. Elizabeths, a National Historic Landmark and former government-run hospital for the insane, was the most viable site for this consolidation. The original plan to use only the West Campus triggered concerns about the density of development that would occur. After discussions with the District of Columbia, a November 2008 Final EIS on the St. Elizabeths Campus Master Plan for the Consolidated Headquarters of the DHS assessed an alternative that would place development on both campuses. The subsequent Record of Decision selected the alternative that would consolidate 3.8 million gsf of secure office and shared-use space on the St. Elizabeths West Campus and assessed the impacts of constructing 750,000 gsf of office space, plus associated parking, on the St. Elizabeths East Campus at a programmatic level. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this Master Plan Amendment draft EIS analyzes three action alternatives for the East Campus North Parcel: Alternative A (East West Bars), Alternative B (Campus Reflection), and Alternative C (Atrium). In addition, the General Services Administration (GSA) is reevaluating transportation improvements required for the DHS consolidation that were considered in the 2008 Final Master Plan EIS. Two alternatives (1 and 2) for the Interstate 295/Malcolm X Avenue interchange and proposed West Campus Access Road, Firth Sterling Avenue/West Campus Access Road intersection, widening of Martin Luther King Jr. (MLK) Avenue, and needed transportation improvements to support the East Campus development are considered. The headquarters of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), a DHS component agency, would be located on the North Parcel to house 3,089 FEMA headquarters staff. Occupation would occur by 2014. The new DHS/FEMA headquarters buildings would likely be five to seven stories above the current ground surface on the western side of the North Parcel. Development of the North Parcel would also include: a parking garage for approximately 775 vehicles; sidewalks and surface parking; a tunnel under MLK Avenue linking the East and West Campuses; a secure perimeter fence; VIP access and parking; shipping/receiving dock; shuttle bus hub; electric power, communications, and other utility corridors; realignment of site drainages and landscaping; and transportation improvements to support East Campus North Parcel development. Existing structures would be retained, relocated, or demolished. The Dix Pavilion would be demolished to prepare the site for the FEMA facility. The existing Veterans Shelter would be demolished and its operations would be relocated. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Completion of the consolidation of DHS Headquarters activities with a highly advantageous location, would help ensure the economic and operational efficiency and effectiveness of operations aimed at dealing with catastrophes and terrorist operations. Now disparate agencies and offices within agencies would be gathered into one well coordinated built-to-purpose facility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Clearing, grading, and removal of vegetation would cause erosion, introduction of pollutants into surface water, and long-term impacts on landscapes and historic buildings. Archaeological resource sites would also be disturbed or destroyed. New construction at both the campus and the interchange site would disturb wetlands and alter groundwater hydrology and quality. Long-term adverse impacts to transportation would occur. LEGAL MANDATES: National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100470, Draft EIS (Volume I)--636 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--626 pages, December 10, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 15 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Buildings KW - Demolition KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Hospitals KW - Municipal Services KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Site Planning KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - District of Columbia KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127210?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - General Services Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; GSA N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 10, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 14 of 22] T2 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 873127207; 14740-0_0014 AB - PURPOSE: The completion of the consolidation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Headquarters offices at St. Elizabeths in Southeast Washington, District of Columbia by amending the 2008 Master Plan to construct and operate just over one million gross square feet (gsf) of development within the 32-acre East Campus North Parcel site is proposed. DHS previously identified the need to provide 4.5 million gross square feet (gsf) of secure office space, plus parking, for its consolidated Headquarters and concluded that St. Elizabeths, a National Historic Landmark and former government-run hospital for the insane, was the most viable site for this consolidation. The original plan to use only the West Campus triggered concerns about the density of development that would occur. After discussions with the District of Columbia, a November 2008 Final EIS on the St. Elizabeths Campus Master Plan for the Consolidated Headquarters of the DHS assessed an alternative that would place development on both campuses. The subsequent Record of Decision selected the alternative that would consolidate 3.8 million gsf of secure office and shared-use space on the St. Elizabeths West Campus and assessed the impacts of constructing 750,000 gsf of office space, plus associated parking, on the St. Elizabeths East Campus at a programmatic level. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this Master Plan Amendment draft EIS analyzes three action alternatives for the East Campus North Parcel: Alternative A (East West Bars), Alternative B (Campus Reflection), and Alternative C (Atrium). In addition, the General Services Administration (GSA) is reevaluating transportation improvements required for the DHS consolidation that were considered in the 2008 Final Master Plan EIS. Two alternatives (1 and 2) for the Interstate 295/Malcolm X Avenue interchange and proposed West Campus Access Road, Firth Sterling Avenue/West Campus Access Road intersection, widening of Martin Luther King Jr. (MLK) Avenue, and needed transportation improvements to support the East Campus development are considered. The headquarters of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), a DHS component agency, would be located on the North Parcel to house 3,089 FEMA headquarters staff. Occupation would occur by 2014. The new DHS/FEMA headquarters buildings would likely be five to seven stories above the current ground surface on the western side of the North Parcel. Development of the North Parcel would also include: a parking garage for approximately 775 vehicles; sidewalks and surface parking; a tunnel under MLK Avenue linking the East and West Campuses; a secure perimeter fence; VIP access and parking; shipping/receiving dock; shuttle bus hub; electric power, communications, and other utility corridors; realignment of site drainages and landscaping; and transportation improvements to support East Campus North Parcel development. Existing structures would be retained, relocated, or demolished. The Dix Pavilion would be demolished to prepare the site for the FEMA facility. The existing Veterans Shelter would be demolished and its operations would be relocated. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Completion of the consolidation of DHS Headquarters activities with a highly advantageous location, would help ensure the economic and operational efficiency and effectiveness of operations aimed at dealing with catastrophes and terrorist operations. Now disparate agencies and offices within agencies would be gathered into one well coordinated built-to-purpose facility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Clearing, grading, and removal of vegetation would cause erosion, introduction of pollutants into surface water, and long-term impacts on landscapes and historic buildings. Archaeological resource sites would also be disturbed or destroyed. New construction at both the campus and the interchange site would disturb wetlands and alter groundwater hydrology and quality. Long-term adverse impacts to transportation would occur. LEGAL MANDATES: National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100470, Draft EIS (Volume I)--636 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--626 pages, December 10, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 14 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Buildings KW - Demolition KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Hospitals KW - Municipal Services KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Site Planning KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - District of Columbia KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127207?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - General Services Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; GSA N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 10, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 13 of 22] T2 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 873127204; 14740-0_0013 AB - PURPOSE: The completion of the consolidation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Headquarters offices at St. Elizabeths in Southeast Washington, District of Columbia by amending the 2008 Master Plan to construct and operate just over one million gross square feet (gsf) of development within the 32-acre East Campus North Parcel site is proposed. DHS previously identified the need to provide 4.5 million gross square feet (gsf) of secure office space, plus parking, for its consolidated Headquarters and concluded that St. Elizabeths, a National Historic Landmark and former government-run hospital for the insane, was the most viable site for this consolidation. The original plan to use only the West Campus triggered concerns about the density of development that would occur. After discussions with the District of Columbia, a November 2008 Final EIS on the St. Elizabeths Campus Master Plan for the Consolidated Headquarters of the DHS assessed an alternative that would place development on both campuses. The subsequent Record of Decision selected the alternative that would consolidate 3.8 million gsf of secure office and shared-use space on the St. Elizabeths West Campus and assessed the impacts of constructing 750,000 gsf of office space, plus associated parking, on the St. Elizabeths East Campus at a programmatic level. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this Master Plan Amendment draft EIS analyzes three action alternatives for the East Campus North Parcel: Alternative A (East West Bars), Alternative B (Campus Reflection), and Alternative C (Atrium). In addition, the General Services Administration (GSA) is reevaluating transportation improvements required for the DHS consolidation that were considered in the 2008 Final Master Plan EIS. Two alternatives (1 and 2) for the Interstate 295/Malcolm X Avenue interchange and proposed West Campus Access Road, Firth Sterling Avenue/West Campus Access Road intersection, widening of Martin Luther King Jr. (MLK) Avenue, and needed transportation improvements to support the East Campus development are considered. The headquarters of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), a DHS component agency, would be located on the North Parcel to house 3,089 FEMA headquarters staff. Occupation would occur by 2014. The new DHS/FEMA headquarters buildings would likely be five to seven stories above the current ground surface on the western side of the North Parcel. Development of the North Parcel would also include: a parking garage for approximately 775 vehicles; sidewalks and surface parking; a tunnel under MLK Avenue linking the East and West Campuses; a secure perimeter fence; VIP access and parking; shipping/receiving dock; shuttle bus hub; electric power, communications, and other utility corridors; realignment of site drainages and landscaping; and transportation improvements to support East Campus North Parcel development. Existing structures would be retained, relocated, or demolished. The Dix Pavilion would be demolished to prepare the site for the FEMA facility. The existing Veterans Shelter would be demolished and its operations would be relocated. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Completion of the consolidation of DHS Headquarters activities with a highly advantageous location, would help ensure the economic and operational efficiency and effectiveness of operations aimed at dealing with catastrophes and terrorist operations. Now disparate agencies and offices within agencies would be gathered into one well coordinated built-to-purpose facility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Clearing, grading, and removal of vegetation would cause erosion, introduction of pollutants into surface water, and long-term impacts on landscapes and historic buildings. Archaeological resource sites would also be disturbed or destroyed. New construction at both the campus and the interchange site would disturb wetlands and alter groundwater hydrology and quality. Long-term adverse impacts to transportation would occur. LEGAL MANDATES: National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100470, Draft EIS (Volume I)--636 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--626 pages, December 10, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 13 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Buildings KW - Demolition KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Hospitals KW - Municipal Services KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Site Planning KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - District of Columbia KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127204?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - General Services Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; GSA N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 10, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 6 of 22] T2 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 873127201; 14740-0_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The completion of the consolidation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Headquarters offices at St. Elizabeths in Southeast Washington, District of Columbia by amending the 2008 Master Plan to construct and operate just over one million gross square feet (gsf) of development within the 32-acre East Campus North Parcel site is proposed. DHS previously identified the need to provide 4.5 million gross square feet (gsf) of secure office space, plus parking, for its consolidated Headquarters and concluded that St. Elizabeths, a National Historic Landmark and former government-run hospital for the insane, was the most viable site for this consolidation. The original plan to use only the West Campus triggered concerns about the density of development that would occur. After discussions with the District of Columbia, a November 2008 Final EIS on the St. Elizabeths Campus Master Plan for the Consolidated Headquarters of the DHS assessed an alternative that would place development on both campuses. The subsequent Record of Decision selected the alternative that would consolidate 3.8 million gsf of secure office and shared-use space on the St. Elizabeths West Campus and assessed the impacts of constructing 750,000 gsf of office space, plus associated parking, on the St. Elizabeths East Campus at a programmatic level. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this Master Plan Amendment draft EIS analyzes three action alternatives for the East Campus North Parcel: Alternative A (East West Bars), Alternative B (Campus Reflection), and Alternative C (Atrium). In addition, the General Services Administration (GSA) is reevaluating transportation improvements required for the DHS consolidation that were considered in the 2008 Final Master Plan EIS. Two alternatives (1 and 2) for the Interstate 295/Malcolm X Avenue interchange and proposed West Campus Access Road, Firth Sterling Avenue/West Campus Access Road intersection, widening of Martin Luther King Jr. (MLK) Avenue, and needed transportation improvements to support the East Campus development are considered. The headquarters of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), a DHS component agency, would be located on the North Parcel to house 3,089 FEMA headquarters staff. Occupation would occur by 2014. The new DHS/FEMA headquarters buildings would likely be five to seven stories above the current ground surface on the western side of the North Parcel. Development of the North Parcel would also include: a parking garage for approximately 775 vehicles; sidewalks and surface parking; a tunnel under MLK Avenue linking the East and West Campuses; a secure perimeter fence; VIP access and parking; shipping/receiving dock; shuttle bus hub; electric power, communications, and other utility corridors; realignment of site drainages and landscaping; and transportation improvements to support East Campus North Parcel development. Existing structures would be retained, relocated, or demolished. The Dix Pavilion would be demolished to prepare the site for the FEMA facility. The existing Veterans Shelter would be demolished and its operations would be relocated. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Completion of the consolidation of DHS Headquarters activities with a highly advantageous location, would help ensure the economic and operational efficiency and effectiveness of operations aimed at dealing with catastrophes and terrorist operations. Now disparate agencies and offices within agencies would be gathered into one well coordinated built-to-purpose facility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Clearing, grading, and removal of vegetation would cause erosion, introduction of pollutants into surface water, and long-term impacts on landscapes and historic buildings. Archaeological resource sites would also be disturbed or destroyed. New construction at both the campus and the interchange site would disturb wetlands and alter groundwater hydrology and quality. Long-term adverse impacts to transportation would occur. LEGAL MANDATES: National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100470, Draft EIS (Volume I)--636 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--626 pages, December 10, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Buildings KW - Demolition KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Hospitals KW - Municipal Services KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Site Planning KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - District of Columbia KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127201?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - General Services Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; GSA N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 10, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 9 of 22] T2 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 873126786; 14740-0_0009 AB - PURPOSE: The completion of the consolidation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Headquarters offices at St. Elizabeths in Southeast Washington, District of Columbia by amending the 2008 Master Plan to construct and operate just over one million gross square feet (gsf) of development within the 32-acre East Campus North Parcel site is proposed. DHS previously identified the need to provide 4.5 million gross square feet (gsf) of secure office space, plus parking, for its consolidated Headquarters and concluded that St. Elizabeths, a National Historic Landmark and former government-run hospital for the insane, was the most viable site for this consolidation. The original plan to use only the West Campus triggered concerns about the density of development that would occur. After discussions with the District of Columbia, a November 2008 Final EIS on the St. Elizabeths Campus Master Plan for the Consolidated Headquarters of the DHS assessed an alternative that would place development on both campuses. The subsequent Record of Decision selected the alternative that would consolidate 3.8 million gsf of secure office and shared-use space on the St. Elizabeths West Campus and assessed the impacts of constructing 750,000 gsf of office space, plus associated parking, on the St. Elizabeths East Campus at a programmatic level. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this Master Plan Amendment draft EIS analyzes three action alternatives for the East Campus North Parcel: Alternative A (East West Bars), Alternative B (Campus Reflection), and Alternative C (Atrium). In addition, the General Services Administration (GSA) is reevaluating transportation improvements required for the DHS consolidation that were considered in the 2008 Final Master Plan EIS. Two alternatives (1 and 2) for the Interstate 295/Malcolm X Avenue interchange and proposed West Campus Access Road, Firth Sterling Avenue/West Campus Access Road intersection, widening of Martin Luther King Jr. (MLK) Avenue, and needed transportation improvements to support the East Campus development are considered. The headquarters of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), a DHS component agency, would be located on the North Parcel to house 3,089 FEMA headquarters staff. Occupation would occur by 2014. The new DHS/FEMA headquarters buildings would likely be five to seven stories above the current ground surface on the western side of the North Parcel. Development of the North Parcel would also include: a parking garage for approximately 775 vehicles; sidewalks and surface parking; a tunnel under MLK Avenue linking the East and West Campuses; a secure perimeter fence; VIP access and parking; shipping/receiving dock; shuttle bus hub; electric power, communications, and other utility corridors; realignment of site drainages and landscaping; and transportation improvements to support East Campus North Parcel development. Existing structures would be retained, relocated, or demolished. The Dix Pavilion would be demolished to prepare the site for the FEMA facility. The existing Veterans Shelter would be demolished and its operations would be relocated. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Completion of the consolidation of DHS Headquarters activities with a highly advantageous location, would help ensure the economic and operational efficiency and effectiveness of operations aimed at dealing with catastrophes and terrorist operations. Now disparate agencies and offices within agencies would be gathered into one well coordinated built-to-purpose facility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Clearing, grading, and removal of vegetation would cause erosion, introduction of pollutants into surface water, and long-term impacts on landscapes and historic buildings. Archaeological resource sites would also be disturbed or destroyed. New construction at both the campus and the interchange site would disturb wetlands and alter groundwater hydrology and quality. Long-term adverse impacts to transportation would occur. LEGAL MANDATES: National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100470, Draft EIS (Volume I)--636 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--626 pages, December 10, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 9 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Buildings KW - Demolition KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Hospitals KW - Municipal Services KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Site Planning KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - District of Columbia KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126786?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - General Services Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; GSA N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 10, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 8 of 22] T2 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 873126782; 14740-0_0008 AB - PURPOSE: The completion of the consolidation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Headquarters offices at St. Elizabeths in Southeast Washington, District of Columbia by amending the 2008 Master Plan to construct and operate just over one million gross square feet (gsf) of development within the 32-acre East Campus North Parcel site is proposed. DHS previously identified the need to provide 4.5 million gross square feet (gsf) of secure office space, plus parking, for its consolidated Headquarters and concluded that St. Elizabeths, a National Historic Landmark and former government-run hospital for the insane, was the most viable site for this consolidation. The original plan to use only the West Campus triggered concerns about the density of development that would occur. After discussions with the District of Columbia, a November 2008 Final EIS on the St. Elizabeths Campus Master Plan for the Consolidated Headquarters of the DHS assessed an alternative that would place development on both campuses. The subsequent Record of Decision selected the alternative that would consolidate 3.8 million gsf of secure office and shared-use space on the St. Elizabeths West Campus and assessed the impacts of constructing 750,000 gsf of office space, plus associated parking, on the St. Elizabeths East Campus at a programmatic level. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this Master Plan Amendment draft EIS analyzes three action alternatives for the East Campus North Parcel: Alternative A (East West Bars), Alternative B (Campus Reflection), and Alternative C (Atrium). In addition, the General Services Administration (GSA) is reevaluating transportation improvements required for the DHS consolidation that were considered in the 2008 Final Master Plan EIS. Two alternatives (1 and 2) for the Interstate 295/Malcolm X Avenue interchange and proposed West Campus Access Road, Firth Sterling Avenue/West Campus Access Road intersection, widening of Martin Luther King Jr. (MLK) Avenue, and needed transportation improvements to support the East Campus development are considered. The headquarters of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), a DHS component agency, would be located on the North Parcel to house 3,089 FEMA headquarters staff. Occupation would occur by 2014. The new DHS/FEMA headquarters buildings would likely be five to seven stories above the current ground surface on the western side of the North Parcel. Development of the North Parcel would also include: a parking garage for approximately 775 vehicles; sidewalks and surface parking; a tunnel under MLK Avenue linking the East and West Campuses; a secure perimeter fence; VIP access and parking; shipping/receiving dock; shuttle bus hub; electric power, communications, and other utility corridors; realignment of site drainages and landscaping; and transportation improvements to support East Campus North Parcel development. Existing structures would be retained, relocated, or demolished. The Dix Pavilion would be demolished to prepare the site for the FEMA facility. The existing Veterans Shelter would be demolished and its operations would be relocated. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Completion of the consolidation of DHS Headquarters activities with a highly advantageous location, would help ensure the economic and operational efficiency and effectiveness of operations aimed at dealing with catastrophes and terrorist operations. Now disparate agencies and offices within agencies would be gathered into one well coordinated built-to-purpose facility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Clearing, grading, and removal of vegetation would cause erosion, introduction of pollutants into surface water, and long-term impacts on landscapes and historic buildings. Archaeological resource sites would also be disturbed or destroyed. New construction at both the campus and the interchange site would disturb wetlands and alter groundwater hydrology and quality. Long-term adverse impacts to transportation would occur. LEGAL MANDATES: National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100470, Draft EIS (Volume I)--636 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--626 pages, December 10, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 8 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Buildings KW - Demolition KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Hospitals KW - Municipal Services KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Site Planning KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - District of Columbia KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126782?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - General Services Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; GSA N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 10, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 7 of 22] T2 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION AT ST. ELIZABETHS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT - EAST CAMPUS NORTH PARCEL, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 873126777; 14740-0_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The completion of the consolidation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Headquarters offices at St. Elizabeths in Southeast Washington, District of Columbia by amending the 2008 Master Plan to construct and operate just over one million gross square feet (gsf) of development within the 32-acre East Campus North Parcel site is proposed. DHS previously identified the need to provide 4.5 million gross square feet (gsf) of secure office space, plus parking, for its consolidated Headquarters and concluded that St. Elizabeths, a National Historic Landmark and former government-run hospital for the insane, was the most viable site for this consolidation. The original plan to use only the West Campus triggered concerns about the density of development that would occur. After discussions with the District of Columbia, a November 2008 Final EIS on the St. Elizabeths Campus Master Plan for the Consolidated Headquarters of the DHS assessed an alternative that would place development on both campuses. The subsequent Record of Decision selected the alternative that would consolidate 3.8 million gsf of secure office and shared-use space on the St. Elizabeths West Campus and assessed the impacts of constructing 750,000 gsf of office space, plus associated parking, on the St. Elizabeths East Campus at a programmatic level. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this Master Plan Amendment draft EIS analyzes three action alternatives for the East Campus North Parcel: Alternative A (East West Bars), Alternative B (Campus Reflection), and Alternative C (Atrium). In addition, the General Services Administration (GSA) is reevaluating transportation improvements required for the DHS consolidation that were considered in the 2008 Final Master Plan EIS. Two alternatives (1 and 2) for the Interstate 295/Malcolm X Avenue interchange and proposed West Campus Access Road, Firth Sterling Avenue/West Campus Access Road intersection, widening of Martin Luther King Jr. (MLK) Avenue, and needed transportation improvements to support the East Campus development are considered. The headquarters of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), a DHS component agency, would be located on the North Parcel to house 3,089 FEMA headquarters staff. Occupation would occur by 2014. The new DHS/FEMA headquarters buildings would likely be five to seven stories above the current ground surface on the western side of the North Parcel. Development of the North Parcel would also include: a parking garage for approximately 775 vehicles; sidewalks and surface parking; a tunnel under MLK Avenue linking the East and West Campuses; a secure perimeter fence; VIP access and parking; shipping/receiving dock; shuttle bus hub; electric power, communications, and other utility corridors; realignment of site drainages and landscaping; and transportation improvements to support East Campus North Parcel development. Existing structures would be retained, relocated, or demolished. The Dix Pavilion would be demolished to prepare the site for the FEMA facility. The existing Veterans Shelter would be demolished and its operations would be relocated. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Completion of the consolidation of DHS Headquarters activities with a highly advantageous location, would help ensure the economic and operational efficiency and effectiveness of operations aimed at dealing with catastrophes and terrorist operations. Now disparate agencies and offices within agencies would be gathered into one well coordinated built-to-purpose facility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Clearing, grading, and removal of vegetation would cause erosion, introduction of pollutants into surface water, and long-term impacts on landscapes and historic buildings. Archaeological resource sites would also be disturbed or destroyed. New construction at both the campus and the interchange site would disturb wetlands and alter groundwater hydrology and quality. Long-term adverse impacts to transportation would occur. LEGAL MANDATES: National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100470, Draft EIS (Volume I)--636 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--626 pages, December 10, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 7 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Buildings KW - Demolition KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Hospitals KW - Municipal Services KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Site Planning KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - District of Columbia KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126777?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=DEPARTMENT+OF+HOMELAND+SECURITY+HEADQUARTERS+CONSOLIDATION+AT+ST.+ELIZABETHS+MASTER+PLAN+AMENDMENT+-+EAST+CAMPUS+NORTH+PARCEL%2C+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - General Services Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; GSA N1 - Date revised - 2011-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 10, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 53 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873129804; 14730-0_0053 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 53 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129804?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 52 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873129774; 14730-0_0052 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 52 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129774?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 51 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873129753; 14730-0_0051 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 51 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129753?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 50 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873129726; 14730-0_0050 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 50 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129726?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 49 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873129698; 14730-0_0049 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 49 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129698?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 40 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873129658; 14730-0_0040 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 40 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129658?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 38 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873129620; 14730-0_0038 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 38 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129620?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 30 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873129573; 14730-0_0030 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 30 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129573?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 29 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873129545; 14730-0_0029 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 29 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129545?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 28 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873129508; 14730-0_0028 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 28 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129508?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 27 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873129465; 14730-0_0027 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 27 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129465?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 24 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873129430; 14730-0_0024 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 24 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129430?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 19 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873129400; 14730-0_0019 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 19 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129400?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 48 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873129324; 14730-0_0048 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 48 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129324?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 47 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873129257; 14730-0_0047 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 47 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129257?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 54 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873129214; 14730-0_0054 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 54 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129214?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 44 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873129212; 14730-0_0044 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 44 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129212?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 42 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873129153; 14730-0_0042 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 42 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129153?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 41 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873129127; 14730-0_0041 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 41 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129127?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 37 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873129106; 14730-0_0037 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 37 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129106?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 36 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873129081; 14730-0_0036 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 36 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129081?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 32 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873129056; 14730-0_0032 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 32 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129056?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 31 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873129037; 14730-0_0031 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 31 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129037?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 23 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873129005; 14730-0_0023 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 23 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129005?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 57 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873128971; 14730-0_0057 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 57 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128971?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 22 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873128967; 14730-0_0022 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 22 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128967?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 21 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873128942; 14730-0_0021 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 21 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128942?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 56 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873128933; 14730-0_0056 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 56 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128933?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 26 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873128912; 14730-0_0026 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 26 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128912?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 25 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873128895; 14730-0_0025 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 25 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128895?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=The+Leadership+Quarterly&rft.atitle=Leading+across+language+barriers%3A+Managing+language-induced+emotions+in+multinational+teams&rft.au=Tenzer%2C+Helene%3BPudelko%2C+Markus&rft.aulast=Tenzer&rft.aufirst=Helene&rft.date=2015-08-01&rft.volume=26&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=606&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=The+Leadership+Quarterly&rft.issn=10489843&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016%2Fj.leaqua.2015.05.006 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 59 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873128805; 14730-0_0059 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 59 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128805?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 58 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873128786; 14730-0_0058 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 58 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128786?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 7 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873128703; 14730-0_0007 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 7 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128703?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 46 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873128696; 14730-0_0046 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 46 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128696?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 45 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873128668; 14730-0_0045 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 45 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128668?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 62 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873128652; 14730-0_0062 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 62 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128652?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 60 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873128636; 14730-0_0060 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 60 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128636?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 61 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873128626; 14730-0_0061 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 61 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128626?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 18 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873128597; 14730-0_0018 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 18 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128597?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 55 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873128578; 14730-0_0055 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 55 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128578?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 43 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873128528; 14730-0_0043 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 43 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128528?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 39 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873128498; 14730-0_0039 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 39 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128498?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 35 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873128478; 14730-0_0035 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 35 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128478?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 34 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873128466; 14730-0_0034 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 34 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128466?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 33 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873128432; 14730-0_0033 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 33 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128432?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 10 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873128328; 14730-0_0010 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 10 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128328?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 9 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873128321; 14730-0_0009 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 9 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128321?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 8 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873128309; 14730-0_0008 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 8 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128309?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 14 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873128259; 14730-0_0014 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 14 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128259?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 13 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873128168; 14730-0_0013 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 13 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128168?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 1 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873128149; 14730-0_0001 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128149?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 12 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873127974; 14730-0_0012 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 12 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127974?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 11 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873127968; 14730-0_0011 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 11 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127968?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 3 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873127962; 14730-0_0003 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127962?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 2 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873127952; 14730-0_0002 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127952?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 20 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873127936; 14730-0_0020 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 20 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127936?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 5 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873127932; 14730-0_0005 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127932?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 4 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873127925; 14730-0_0004 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127925?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 15 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873127786; 14730-0_0015 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 15 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127786?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 6 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873127632; 14730-0_0006 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127632?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 17 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873127621; 14730-0_0017 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 17 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127621?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 16 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873127612; 14730-0_0016 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 16 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127612?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 89 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873127581; 14730-0_0089 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 89 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127581?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 88 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873127572; 14730-0_0088 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 88 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127572?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 87 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873127561; 14730-0_0087 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 87 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127561?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 80 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873127553; 14730-0_0080 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 80 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127553?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 79 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873127540; 14730-0_0079 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 79 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127540?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 78 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873127527; 14730-0_0078 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 78 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127527?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 66 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873127517; 14730-0_0066 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 66 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127517?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 65 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873127503; 14730-0_0065 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 65 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127503?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 64 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873127490; 14730-0_0064 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 64 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127490?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 63 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873127481; 14730-0_0063 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 63 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127481?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 77 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873127173; 14730-0_0077 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 77 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127173?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 76 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873127167; 14730-0_0076 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 76 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127167?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 75 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873127162; 14730-0_0075 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 75 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127162?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 72 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873127151; 14730-0_0072 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 72 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127151?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 71 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873127145; 14730-0_0071 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 71 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127145?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 70 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873127136; 14730-0_0070 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 70 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127136?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 82 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873127045; 14730-0_0082 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 82 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127045?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 81 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873127033; 14730-0_0081 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 81 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127033?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 69 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873127022; 14730-0_0069 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 69 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127022?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 68 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873127013; 14730-0_0068 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 68 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127013?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 67 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873127002; 14730-0_0067 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 67 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127002?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 74 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873126628; 14730-0_0074 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 74 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126628?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 73 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873126615; 14730-0_0073 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 73 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126615?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 86 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873126513; 14730-0_0086 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 86 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126513?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 85 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873126502; 14730-0_0085 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 85 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126502?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 84 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873126470; 14730-0_0084 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 84 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126470?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 83 of 89] T2 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873126452; 14730-0_0083 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 83 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126452?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WA-520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 16373193; 14730 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The State Route 520 (SR 520) Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. This alternative would also avoid an archeological site eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as well as effects on 4.8 acres of wetlands. The 51-acre site lies on the north shore of Grays Harbor and has recently been used for log storage. The generally flat site, which is undeveloped except for unpaved access roads, is bounded by industrial land uses to the west and east and railroad tracks along the northern boundary; the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. The shoreline at this site is a mix of small patches of vegetation, small and large rocks heavily embedded in mud, and driftwood on the face of a short berm covered with shrubs and alder saplings. Washington Department of Transportation would purchase the whole property, and the casting basin and support facilities would occupy the entire site. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a new casting basin facility would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in the event of bridge failure from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would remove 1.04 acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.06 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of three acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Fish and wildlife in the project vicinity could be affected by noise associated with pile-driving. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0165D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100460, Executive Summary, Final EIS, and Appendices--CD-ROM, December 2, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Water KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/16373193?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=WA-520+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAYS+HARBOR+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Incident tree model and incident tree analysis method for quantified risk assessment: An in-depth accident study in traffic operation AN - 760216525; 13667995 AB - Fault tree analysis (FTA) is a logically structured process that can help identify potential causes of system failure before the failures actually occur. However, FTA often suffers from a lack of enough probabilistic basic events to check the consistency of the logic relationship among all events through linkage with gates. Sometimes, even logic relationship among all events is difficult to determine, and failures in system operation may have been experienced rarely or not at all. In order to address the limitations, this paper proposes a novel incident tree methodology that characterizes the information flow in a system instead of logical relationship, and the amount of information of a fuzzy incident instead of probability of an event. From probability statistics to fuzzy information quantities of basic incidents and accident, we propose an incident tree model and incident tree analysis (ITA) method for identification of uncertain, random, complex, possible and variable characteristic of accident occurrence in quantified risk assessment. In our research, a much detailed example for demonstrating how to create an incident tree model has been conducted by an in-depth analysis of traffic accident causation. The case study of vehicle-leaving-roadway accident with ITA illustrates that the proposed methodology may not only capture the essential information transformations of accident that occur in system operation, but also determine the various combinations of hardware faults, software failures and human errors that could result in the occurrence of specified undesired incident at the system level even accident. JF - Safety Science AU - Wang, Wuhong AU - Jiang, Xiaobei AU - Xia, Shuangchen AU - Cao, Qi AD - Department of Transportation Engineering, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081, PR China Y1 - 2010/12// PY - 2010 DA - Dec 2010 SP - 1248 EP - 1262 PB - Elsevier Science, P.O. Box 211 Amsterdam 1000 AE Netherlands VL - 48 IS - 10 SN - 0925-7535, 0925-7535 KW - Risk Abstracts; Health & Safety Science Abstracts KW - Incident tree analysis KW - Quantified risk assessment KW - Fault tree KW - Information flow KW - Fuzzy set KW - Risk assessment KW - case studies KW - Computer programs KW - Accidents KW - traffic KW - Trees KW - Human factors KW - traffic safety KW - H 2000:Transportation KW - R2 23010:General: Models, forecasting UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/760216525?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ariskabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Safety+Science&rft.atitle=Incident+tree+model+and+incident+tree+analysis+method+for+quantified+risk+assessment%3A+An+in-depth+accident+study+in+traffic+operation&rft.au=Wang%2C+Wuhong%3BJiang%2C+Xiaobei%3BXia%2C+Shuangchen%3BCao%2C+Qi&rft.aulast=Wang&rft.aufirst=Wuhong&rft.date=2010-12-01&rft.volume=48&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=1248&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Safety+Science&rft.issn=09257535&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016%2Fj.ssci.2010.04.002 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2011-05-01 N1 - Last updated - 2015-04-09 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - case studies; Risk assessment; Computer programs; Accidents; traffic; Trees; Human factors; traffic safety DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2010.04.002 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 11 AND THE OTAY MESA EAST PORT OF ENTRY, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA (TIER II ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 1 of 1] T2 - STATE ROUTE 11 AND THE OTAY MESA EAST PORT OF ENTRY, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA (TIER II ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 873126252; 14728-8_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of State Route (SR) 11 and a new Otay Mesa East Port of Entry (POE) and Commercial Vehicle Enforcement Facility (CVEF) at the U.S.- Mexico international border in the unincorporated community of East Otay Mesa, San Diego County, California is proposed. Capacities of the existing POEs in the region are currently being exceeded and transportation and land use planning agencies on both sides of the border have identified the longer-term need for a third border crossing and associated transportation facilities in the San Diego/Tijuana area. The proposed facilities are being studied under a two-tier process and a 2008 Tier I final EIS identified the preferred location for the facilities; a conditional Presidential Permit for the project was granted by the U.S. State Department in November 2008. Three build alternatives, with several design/operational variations, as well as a No Build Alternative are evaluated in this draft EIS. Under each of the build alternatives, SR-11 would be constructed as a 2.1-mile, four-lane toll highway, with two lanes in each direction, plus auxiliary lanes and connectors. It would extend east from the vicinity of Harvest Road (near the future SR-125/SR-905 interchange currently under construction) for 1.5 miles, before curving to the southeast near Alta Road and continuing for 0.6 mile to connect with the POE/CVEF site. To link SR-11 to SR-905, it would be necessary to modify the approved design of the eastern portion of SR-905 that is currently under construction. SR-11 would be located midway between Otay Mesa Road and Airway Road for most of its length, and would cross four local surface streets: Sanyo Avenue, Enrico Fermi Drive, Alta Road, and Siempre Viva Road. Undercrossings, overcrossings or interchanges would be provided at each of these locations, depending on the project alternative. The proposed POE would occupy 106 acres, and would accommodate northbound and southbound commercial and passenger traffic, as well as pedestrians and bicycles. The POE site would be accessed from the north by SR-11. From the south, entry would be through the proposed Otay II POE on the Mexico side of the border. Facilities would likely include inspection lanes, booths and canopies, a commercial vehicle and cargo inspection system, commercial import inspection building and docks, bulk storage inspection bins, a bird quarantine building, a commercial truck impound lot and a seizure vault. Other non-commercial facilities would include the main building, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and a general parking lot. The proposed new CVEF, which would occupy 23 acres east of SR-11 along the northern POE boundary. After receiving clearance to enter the U.S. at the POE, northbound commercial vehicles would be routed into the CVEF facility for a safety/weight inspection prior to being released onto the regional roadway system. The CVEF design is expected to include a 7,900-square foot main building, commercial vehicle scales, and inspections bays. Without variations, the build alternatives would range in cost from $519 million for the No Interchange Alternative to $537 million for the Two Interchange Alternative. Implementation of the Siempre Viva Road full interchange variation with the Two Interchange Alternative would increase the cost of this alternative to $558 million. The SR-125 Connector variation or SR-905/SR-125/SR-11 full interchange variation would add an estimated $25 million or $46 million, respectively, to the cost of any of the build alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: New facilities would: increase inspection processing capacities and accommodate projected increases in international trade and personal cross-border travel in the San Diego/Tijuana region in a safe and secure manner; contribute to reductions in congestion at existing POEs; and accommodate commercial goods movement and cross-border travel to and from the Otay Mesa East POE. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require conversion of 239.7 to 264.7 acres to transportation use, acquisition of 220.5 to 245.2 acres of land, cause direct impacts to 111.5 acres of San Diego fairy shrimp critical habitat and 4.2 acres of Quino checkerspot butterfly critical habitat. Operation of the new Otay Mesa East POE would result in cumulative traffic impacts to select freeway segments, roadway segments and intersections in the project study area and noise levels would exceed noise abatement criteria at one location with sensitive receptors. Just east of Sanyo Avenue, the project would construct up to 26-foot high retaining walls in close proximity to existing buildings, resulting in an adverse impact on the visual environment. LEGAL MANDATES: Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier I draft and final EISs, see 08-0085D, Volume 32, Number 1 and 08-0459F, Volume 32, Number 4, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100458, 660 pages and maps on CD-ROM, November 29, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Border Stations KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Insects KW - International Programs KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Roads KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Mexico KW - Endangered Species Act of 1973, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126252?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=STATE+ROUTE+11+AND+THE+OTAY+MESA+EAST+PORT+OF+ENTRY%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+DIEGO%2C+CALIFORNIA+%28TIER+II+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=STATE+ROUTE+11+AND+THE+OTAY+MESA+EAST+PORT+OF+ENTRY%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+DIEGO%2C+CALIFORNIA+%28TIER+II+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Sacramento, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 29, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 11 AND THE OTAY MESA EAST PORT OF ENTRY, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA (TIER II ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 847269952; 14728 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of State Route (SR) 11 and a new Otay Mesa East Port of Entry (POE) and Commercial Vehicle Enforcement Facility (CVEF) at the U.S.- Mexico international border in the unincorporated community of East Otay Mesa, San Diego County, California is proposed. Capacities of the existing POEs in the region are currently being exceeded and transportation and land use planning agencies on both sides of the border have identified the longer-term need for a third border crossing and associated transportation facilities in the San Diego/Tijuana area. The proposed facilities are being studied under a two-tier process and a 2008 Tier I final EIS identified the preferred location for the facilities; a conditional Presidential Permit for the project was granted by the U.S. State Department in November 2008. Three build alternatives, with several design/operational variations, as well as a No Build Alternative are evaluated in this draft EIS. Under each of the build alternatives, SR-11 would be constructed as a 2.1-mile, four-lane toll highway, with two lanes in each direction, plus auxiliary lanes and connectors. It would extend east from the vicinity of Harvest Road (near the future SR-125/SR-905 interchange currently under construction) for 1.5 miles, before curving to the southeast near Alta Road and continuing for 0.6 mile to connect with the POE/CVEF site. To link SR-11 to SR-905, it would be necessary to modify the approved design of the eastern portion of SR-905 that is currently under construction. SR-11 would be located midway between Otay Mesa Road and Airway Road for most of its length, and would cross four local surface streets: Sanyo Avenue, Enrico Fermi Drive, Alta Road, and Siempre Viva Road. Undercrossings, overcrossings or interchanges would be provided at each of these locations, depending on the project alternative. The proposed POE would occupy 106 acres, and would accommodate northbound and southbound commercial and passenger traffic, as well as pedestrians and bicycles. The POE site would be accessed from the north by SR-11. From the south, entry would be through the proposed Otay II POE on the Mexico side of the border. Facilities would likely include inspection lanes, booths and canopies, a commercial vehicle and cargo inspection system, commercial import inspection building and docks, bulk storage inspection bins, a bird quarantine building, a commercial truck impound lot and a seizure vault. Other non-commercial facilities would include the main building, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and a general parking lot. The proposed new CVEF, which would occupy 23 acres east of SR-11 along the northern POE boundary. After receiving clearance to enter the U.S. at the POE, northbound commercial vehicles would be routed into the CVEF facility for a safety/weight inspection prior to being released onto the regional roadway system. The CVEF design is expected to include a 7,900-square foot main building, commercial vehicle scales, and inspections bays. Without variations, the build alternatives would range in cost from $519 million for the No Interchange Alternative to $537 million for the Two Interchange Alternative. Implementation of the Siempre Viva Road full interchange variation with the Two Interchange Alternative would increase the cost of this alternative to $558 million. The SR-125 Connector variation or SR-905/SR-125/SR-11 full interchange variation would add an estimated $25 million or $46 million, respectively, to the cost of any of the build alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: New facilities would: increase inspection processing capacities and accommodate projected increases in international trade and personal cross-border travel in the San Diego/Tijuana region in a safe and secure manner; contribute to reductions in congestion at existing POEs; and accommodate commercial goods movement and cross-border travel to and from the Otay Mesa East POE. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require conversion of 239.7 to 264.7 acres to transportation use, acquisition of 220.5 to 245.2 acres of land, cause direct impacts to 111.5 acres of San Diego fairy shrimp critical habitat and 4.2 acres of Quino checkerspot butterfly critical habitat. Operation of the new Otay Mesa East POE would result in cumulative traffic impacts to select freeway segments, roadway segments and intersections in the project study area and noise levels would exceed noise abatement criteria at one location with sensitive receptors. Just east of Sanyo Avenue, the project would construct up to 26-foot high retaining walls in close proximity to existing buildings, resulting in an adverse impact on the visual environment. LEGAL MANDATES: Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier I draft and final EISs, see 08-0085D, Volume 32, Number 1 and 08-0459F, Volume 32, Number 4, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100458, 660 pages and maps on CD-ROM, November 29, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Border Stations KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Insects KW - International Programs KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Roads KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Mexico KW - Endangered Species Act of 1973, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/847269952?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=STATE+ROUTE+11+AND+THE+OTAY+MESA+EAST+PORT+OF+ENTRY%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+DIEGO%2C+CALIFORNIA+%28TIER+II+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=STATE+ROUTE+11+AND+THE+OTAY+MESA+EAST+PORT+OF+ENTRY%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+DIEGO%2C+CALIFORNIA+%28TIER+II+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Sacramento, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 29, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - LAKE OSWEGO TO PORTLAND TRANSIT PROJECT, CLACKAMAS AND MULTNOMAH COUNTIES, OREGON. [Part 1 of 1] T2 - LAKE OSWEGO TO PORTLAND TRANSIT PROJECT, CLACKAMAS AND MULTNOMAH COUNTIES, OREGON. AN - 873130284; 14726-6_0001 AB - PURPOSE: Public transit improvements in the Lake Oswego to Portland transit corridor in the Portland, Oregon metropolitan region are proposed. Population, employment, congestion, and travel times in the region are all expected to grow significantly and local and regional plans call for Metro, the Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon (TriMet), and the cities of Portland and Lake Oswego to implement improved transit service. The project corridor extends south from downtown Portland for seven miles to downtown Lake Oswego and is constrained to the east by the Willamette River and to the west by the slopes of the Portland West Hills. TriMet Line 35 is the primary trunk bus line serving the corridor and it generally operates on State Highway 43 which connects the two downtowns. The Lake Oswego Transit Center provides connections between Line 35 and other corridor routes. Two additional primary activity centers in the corridor are the South Waterfront District and Johns Landing, which are located immediately south of downtown Portland and include a mix of medium to high-density residential, commercial, retail, and institutional uses. The South Waterfront District includes the existing Portland Streetcar line, connecting Portland State University, downtown Portland and the Pearl and Northwest districts, and the Portland Aerial Tram, connecting the Oregon Health Sciences University campuses in the South Waterfront District and the Portland West Hills. Based on current timelines, the South Waterfront District is also expected to include a station on the Portland to Milwaukie Light Rail line with service beginning in 2015. Three alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are evaluated in this draft EIS. The Enhanced Bus Alternative would involve modifications to bus lines 35 and 36, including removal of half of the bus stops between Lake Oswego and downtown Portland, mostly along Highway 43. Line 36 would run between King City and Lake Oswego. The alternative would also include a new 300-space park-and-ride lot in downtown Lake Oswego. The Streetcar Alternative, which is analyzed in six segments, would extend existing streetcar tracks and service between Southwest Bancroft Street and downtown Lake Oswego, generally parallel to Highway 43, adding about six miles of new streetcar track, with 10 new streetcar stations and two new park-and-ride lots (100 and 300 spaces), using 11 new streetcars. Line 35 and 36 service and bus stops would both cease operations north of downtown Lake Oswego. Three design options for the Streetcar Alternative are evaluated: the Willamette Shore Line, Macadam In-Street, and Macadam Additional Lane options in Segment 3 (Johns Landing); the Willamette Shore Line and Riverwood options in Segment 5 (Dunthorpe/Riverdale); and the Union Pacific Railroad Right of Way and Foothills options in Segment 6 (Lake Oswego). Capital costs of the Enhanced Bus Alternative are estimated at $37.8 million in 2010 dollars; additional annual operating costs are estimated at $2.79 million. Capital costs of the Streetcar Alternative are estimated at up to $347.4 million in 2010 dollars; additional annual operating costs are estimated at $1.25 million. Construction is planned to begin by 2015 and operations to start in 2017. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improving transit within the corridor would optimize the regional transportation system in light of constraints that limit expansion of highway and arterial infrastructure. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the Enhanced Bus Alternative would result in three additional congested intersections, 1.3 acres of fill in the 100-year floodplain, and 0.8 acre of new impervious surface. The Streetcar Alternative would result in: up to seven potential displacements; the net loss of up to 175 parking spaces; two additional congested intersections; one severe noise impact without potential mitigation and up to 28 vibration impacts without mitigation; up to 0.1 acre of filled wetland, 10.1 acres of fill in the 100-year floodplain, and 18.2 acres of new impervious surface; and loss of up to 1.0 acre of parkland in one park. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100456, 543 pages, November 24, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Highways KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Parking KW - Parks KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Oregon KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130284?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-24&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=LAKE+OSWEGO+TO+PORTLAND+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CLACKAMAS+AND+MULTNOMAH+COUNTIES%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=LAKE+OSWEGO+TO+PORTLAND+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CLACKAMAS+AND+MULTNOMAH+COUNTIES%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 24, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - LAKE OSWEGO TO PORTLAND TRANSIT PROJECT, CLACKAMAS AND MULTNOMAH COUNTIES, OREGON. AN - 16370539; 14726 AB - PURPOSE: Public transit improvements in the Lake Oswego to Portland transit corridor in the Portland, Oregon metropolitan region are proposed. Population, employment, congestion, and travel times in the region are all expected to grow significantly and local and regional plans call for Metro, the Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon (TriMet), and the cities of Portland and Lake Oswego to implement improved transit service. The project corridor extends south from downtown Portland for seven miles to downtown Lake Oswego and is constrained to the east by the Willamette River and to the west by the slopes of the Portland West Hills. TriMet Line 35 is the primary trunk bus line serving the corridor and it generally operates on State Highway 43 which connects the two downtowns. The Lake Oswego Transit Center provides connections between Line 35 and other corridor routes. Two additional primary activity centers in the corridor are the South Waterfront District and Johns Landing, which are located immediately south of downtown Portland and include a mix of medium to high-density residential, commercial, retail, and institutional uses. The South Waterfront District includes the existing Portland Streetcar line, connecting Portland State University, downtown Portland and the Pearl and Northwest districts, and the Portland Aerial Tram, connecting the Oregon Health Sciences University campuses in the South Waterfront District and the Portland West Hills. Based on current timelines, the South Waterfront District is also expected to include a station on the Portland to Milwaukie Light Rail line with service beginning in 2015. Three alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are evaluated in this draft EIS. The Enhanced Bus Alternative would involve modifications to bus lines 35 and 36, including removal of half of the bus stops between Lake Oswego and downtown Portland, mostly along Highway 43. Line 36 would run between King City and Lake Oswego. The alternative would also include a new 300-space park-and-ride lot in downtown Lake Oswego. The Streetcar Alternative, which is analyzed in six segments, would extend existing streetcar tracks and service between Southwest Bancroft Street and downtown Lake Oswego, generally parallel to Highway 43, adding about six miles of new streetcar track, with 10 new streetcar stations and two new park-and-ride lots (100 and 300 spaces), using 11 new streetcars. Line 35 and 36 service and bus stops would both cease operations north of downtown Lake Oswego. Three design options for the Streetcar Alternative are evaluated: the Willamette Shore Line, Macadam In-Street, and Macadam Additional Lane options in Segment 3 (Johns Landing); the Willamette Shore Line and Riverwood options in Segment 5 (Dunthorpe/Riverdale); and the Union Pacific Railroad Right of Way and Foothills options in Segment 6 (Lake Oswego). Capital costs of the Enhanced Bus Alternative are estimated at $37.8 million in 2010 dollars; additional annual operating costs are estimated at $2.79 million. Capital costs of the Streetcar Alternative are estimated at up to $347.4 million in 2010 dollars; additional annual operating costs are estimated at $1.25 million. Construction is planned to begin by 2015 and operations to start in 2017. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improving transit within the corridor would optimize the regional transportation system in light of constraints that limit expansion of highway and arterial infrastructure. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the Enhanced Bus Alternative would result in three additional congested intersections, 1.3 acres of fill in the 100-year floodplain, and 0.8 acre of new impervious surface. The Streetcar Alternative would result in: up to seven potential displacements; the net loss of up to 175 parking spaces; two additional congested intersections; one severe noise impact without potential mitigation and up to 28 vibration impacts without mitigation; up to 0.1 acre of filled wetland, 10.1 acres of fill in the 100-year floodplain, and 18.2 acres of new impervious surface; and loss of up to 1.0 acre of parkland in one park. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100456, 543 pages, November 24, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Highways KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Parking KW - Parks KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Oregon KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/16370539?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-24&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=LAKE+OSWEGO+TO+PORTLAND+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CLACKAMAS+AND+MULTNOMAH+COUNTIES%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=LAKE+OSWEGO+TO+PORTLAND+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CLACKAMAS+AND+MULTNOMAH+COUNTIES%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 24, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. [Part 17 of 17] T2 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. AN - 873134037; 14721-1_0017 AB - PURPOSE: The disposal and reuse of Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine (NAS Brunswick) in accordance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, as amended in 2005, are proposed. In addition to the NAS Brunswick property, the disposal and reuse of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and Sabino Hill Rake Station are also proposed. NAS Brunswick is situated on 3,137 acres in the town of Brunswick, Cumberland County, Maine. The facility is approximately 27 miles northeast of Portland and 31 miles south of Augusta. The main gate is located on Bath Road, two miles east of the downtown Brunswick business district. NAS Brunswick is a multi-functional military installation that has evolved over many years to serve various missions. The installation is divided into several distinct land uses and its two active 8,000-foot runways and associated aviation infrastructure are the principal land use features. The built environment consists of a variety of buildings, including aviation support facilities, administrative and training areas, recreation and retail establishments, medical facilities, storage areas, and housing. Construction of these facilities spans from the 1940s to the present day. Two reuse alternatives and a No Action Alternative are considered in this final EIS. Under the No Action Alternative, the U.S. government would retain the NAS Brunswick property in caretaker status. Alternative 1, which is the preferred alternative, would involve reusing the property in a manner consistent with the Brunswick Naval Air Station Reuse Master Plan. Full build-out would be implemented over a 20-year period with development of 1,630 acres resulting in a maximum of 2,946 housing units. In addition, 1,570 acres would be dedicated to a variety of active and passive uses, including recreation, open space, and natural areas. This alternative is based upon reuse of the existing airfield and its supporting infrastructure, a mix of land use types and densities, and the preservation of open space and natural areas. Under Alternative 1, the McKeen Street Housing Annex would remain residential, and the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site would be utilized as recreational, open space, and natural areas. The Sabino Hill Rake Station property would be utilized for parks and recreation. Alternative 2 would consist of a higher density of residential and mixed-use development and no reuse of the airfield. Full build-out of Alternative 2 would be implemented in stages over a 20-year period and would involve development of 1,580 acres resulting in a maximum of 8,220 housing units. Approximately 1,620 acres would be dedicated to active and passive recreation, open spaces, and natural areas. The reuse of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and the Sabino Hill Rake Station properties would be the same under Alternative 1 and Alternative 2. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in an increase in recreational, open space, conservation, and natural areas. Reuse of the installation would provide opportunities for economic development, job creation, and new property tax revenue for the Town of Brunswick. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: At full build-out under Alternative 1, 1,146 acres of undeveloped land, including 690 acres of upland forest, could be affected, and 25 acres of grassland and 50 acres of maintained grass could be developed. A total of 1,060 acres would be preserved. Under Alternative 2, 1,068 acres of undeveloped land, including 578 acres of upland forest, could be removed, and 65 acres of grassland and 301 acres of maintained grass could be developed, while a total of 1,280 acres would be preserved. Initial disposal of NAS Brunswick under either Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in a short-term reduction of income and employment, which would be mitigated through construction spending and new development. LEGAL MANDATES: Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-510). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0172D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100451, Final EIS (Volume I)-- 488 pages, Appendices (Volume II)--680 pages and maps, November 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 17 KW - Defense Programs KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Buildings KW - Demolition KW - Housing KW - Land Use KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Open Space KW - Property Disposition KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Maine KW - Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine KW - Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873134037?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.title=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, BRAC Program Management Office Northeast, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. [Part 16 of 17] T2 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. AN - 873134034; 14721-1_0016 AB - PURPOSE: The disposal and reuse of Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine (NAS Brunswick) in accordance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, as amended in 2005, are proposed. In addition to the NAS Brunswick property, the disposal and reuse of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and Sabino Hill Rake Station are also proposed. NAS Brunswick is situated on 3,137 acres in the town of Brunswick, Cumberland County, Maine. The facility is approximately 27 miles northeast of Portland and 31 miles south of Augusta. The main gate is located on Bath Road, two miles east of the downtown Brunswick business district. NAS Brunswick is a multi-functional military installation that has evolved over many years to serve various missions. The installation is divided into several distinct land uses and its two active 8,000-foot runways and associated aviation infrastructure are the principal land use features. The built environment consists of a variety of buildings, including aviation support facilities, administrative and training areas, recreation and retail establishments, medical facilities, storage areas, and housing. Construction of these facilities spans from the 1940s to the present day. Two reuse alternatives and a No Action Alternative are considered in this final EIS. Under the No Action Alternative, the U.S. government would retain the NAS Brunswick property in caretaker status. Alternative 1, which is the preferred alternative, would involve reusing the property in a manner consistent with the Brunswick Naval Air Station Reuse Master Plan. Full build-out would be implemented over a 20-year period with development of 1,630 acres resulting in a maximum of 2,946 housing units. In addition, 1,570 acres would be dedicated to a variety of active and passive uses, including recreation, open space, and natural areas. This alternative is based upon reuse of the existing airfield and its supporting infrastructure, a mix of land use types and densities, and the preservation of open space and natural areas. Under Alternative 1, the McKeen Street Housing Annex would remain residential, and the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site would be utilized as recreational, open space, and natural areas. The Sabino Hill Rake Station property would be utilized for parks and recreation. Alternative 2 would consist of a higher density of residential and mixed-use development and no reuse of the airfield. Full build-out of Alternative 2 would be implemented in stages over a 20-year period and would involve development of 1,580 acres resulting in a maximum of 8,220 housing units. Approximately 1,620 acres would be dedicated to active and passive recreation, open spaces, and natural areas. The reuse of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and the Sabino Hill Rake Station properties would be the same under Alternative 1 and Alternative 2. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in an increase in recreational, open space, conservation, and natural areas. Reuse of the installation would provide opportunities for economic development, job creation, and new property tax revenue for the Town of Brunswick. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: At full build-out under Alternative 1, 1,146 acres of undeveloped land, including 690 acres of upland forest, could be affected, and 25 acres of grassland and 50 acres of maintained grass could be developed. A total of 1,060 acres would be preserved. Under Alternative 2, 1,068 acres of undeveloped land, including 578 acres of upland forest, could be removed, and 65 acres of grassland and 301 acres of maintained grass could be developed, while a total of 1,280 acres would be preserved. Initial disposal of NAS Brunswick under either Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in a short-term reduction of income and employment, which would be mitigated through construction spending and new development. LEGAL MANDATES: Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-510). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0172D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100451, Final EIS (Volume I)-- 488 pages, Appendices (Volume II)--680 pages and maps, November 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 16 KW - Defense Programs KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Buildings KW - Demolition KW - Housing KW - Land Use KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Open Space KW - Property Disposition KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Maine KW - Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine KW - Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873134034?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.title=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, BRAC Program Management Office Northeast, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. [Part 15 of 17] T2 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. AN - 873134033; 14721-1_0015 AB - PURPOSE: The disposal and reuse of Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine (NAS Brunswick) in accordance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, as amended in 2005, are proposed. In addition to the NAS Brunswick property, the disposal and reuse of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and Sabino Hill Rake Station are also proposed. NAS Brunswick is situated on 3,137 acres in the town of Brunswick, Cumberland County, Maine. The facility is approximately 27 miles northeast of Portland and 31 miles south of Augusta. The main gate is located on Bath Road, two miles east of the downtown Brunswick business district. NAS Brunswick is a multi-functional military installation that has evolved over many years to serve various missions. The installation is divided into several distinct land uses and its two active 8,000-foot runways and associated aviation infrastructure are the principal land use features. The built environment consists of a variety of buildings, including aviation support facilities, administrative and training areas, recreation and retail establishments, medical facilities, storage areas, and housing. Construction of these facilities spans from the 1940s to the present day. Two reuse alternatives and a No Action Alternative are considered in this final EIS. Under the No Action Alternative, the U.S. government would retain the NAS Brunswick property in caretaker status. Alternative 1, which is the preferred alternative, would involve reusing the property in a manner consistent with the Brunswick Naval Air Station Reuse Master Plan. Full build-out would be implemented over a 20-year period with development of 1,630 acres resulting in a maximum of 2,946 housing units. In addition, 1,570 acres would be dedicated to a variety of active and passive uses, including recreation, open space, and natural areas. This alternative is based upon reuse of the existing airfield and its supporting infrastructure, a mix of land use types and densities, and the preservation of open space and natural areas. Under Alternative 1, the McKeen Street Housing Annex would remain residential, and the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site would be utilized as recreational, open space, and natural areas. The Sabino Hill Rake Station property would be utilized for parks and recreation. Alternative 2 would consist of a higher density of residential and mixed-use development and no reuse of the airfield. Full build-out of Alternative 2 would be implemented in stages over a 20-year period and would involve development of 1,580 acres resulting in a maximum of 8,220 housing units. Approximately 1,620 acres would be dedicated to active and passive recreation, open spaces, and natural areas. The reuse of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and the Sabino Hill Rake Station properties would be the same under Alternative 1 and Alternative 2. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in an increase in recreational, open space, conservation, and natural areas. Reuse of the installation would provide opportunities for economic development, job creation, and new property tax revenue for the Town of Brunswick. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: At full build-out under Alternative 1, 1,146 acres of undeveloped land, including 690 acres of upland forest, could be affected, and 25 acres of grassland and 50 acres of maintained grass could be developed. A total of 1,060 acres would be preserved. Under Alternative 2, 1,068 acres of undeveloped land, including 578 acres of upland forest, could be removed, and 65 acres of grassland and 301 acres of maintained grass could be developed, while a total of 1,280 acres would be preserved. Initial disposal of NAS Brunswick under either Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in a short-term reduction of income and employment, which would be mitigated through construction spending and new development. LEGAL MANDATES: Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-510). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0172D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100451, Final EIS (Volume I)-- 488 pages, Appendices (Volume II)--680 pages and maps, November 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 15 KW - Defense Programs KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Buildings KW - Demolition KW - Housing KW - Land Use KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Open Space KW - Property Disposition KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Maine KW - Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine KW - Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873134033?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.title=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, BRAC Program Management Office Northeast, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. [Part 14 of 17] T2 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. AN - 873134031; 14721-1_0014 AB - PURPOSE: The disposal and reuse of Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine (NAS Brunswick) in accordance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, as amended in 2005, are proposed. In addition to the NAS Brunswick property, the disposal and reuse of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and Sabino Hill Rake Station are also proposed. NAS Brunswick is situated on 3,137 acres in the town of Brunswick, Cumberland County, Maine. The facility is approximately 27 miles northeast of Portland and 31 miles south of Augusta. The main gate is located on Bath Road, two miles east of the downtown Brunswick business district. NAS Brunswick is a multi-functional military installation that has evolved over many years to serve various missions. The installation is divided into several distinct land uses and its two active 8,000-foot runways and associated aviation infrastructure are the principal land use features. The built environment consists of a variety of buildings, including aviation support facilities, administrative and training areas, recreation and retail establishments, medical facilities, storage areas, and housing. Construction of these facilities spans from the 1940s to the present day. Two reuse alternatives and a No Action Alternative are considered in this final EIS. Under the No Action Alternative, the U.S. government would retain the NAS Brunswick property in caretaker status. Alternative 1, which is the preferred alternative, would involve reusing the property in a manner consistent with the Brunswick Naval Air Station Reuse Master Plan. Full build-out would be implemented over a 20-year period with development of 1,630 acres resulting in a maximum of 2,946 housing units. In addition, 1,570 acres would be dedicated to a variety of active and passive uses, including recreation, open space, and natural areas. This alternative is based upon reuse of the existing airfield and its supporting infrastructure, a mix of land use types and densities, and the preservation of open space and natural areas. Under Alternative 1, the McKeen Street Housing Annex would remain residential, and the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site would be utilized as recreational, open space, and natural areas. The Sabino Hill Rake Station property would be utilized for parks and recreation. Alternative 2 would consist of a higher density of residential and mixed-use development and no reuse of the airfield. Full build-out of Alternative 2 would be implemented in stages over a 20-year period and would involve development of 1,580 acres resulting in a maximum of 8,220 housing units. Approximately 1,620 acres would be dedicated to active and passive recreation, open spaces, and natural areas. The reuse of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and the Sabino Hill Rake Station properties would be the same under Alternative 1 and Alternative 2. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in an increase in recreational, open space, conservation, and natural areas. Reuse of the installation would provide opportunities for economic development, job creation, and new property tax revenue for the Town of Brunswick. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: At full build-out under Alternative 1, 1,146 acres of undeveloped land, including 690 acres of upland forest, could be affected, and 25 acres of grassland and 50 acres of maintained grass could be developed. A total of 1,060 acres would be preserved. Under Alternative 2, 1,068 acres of undeveloped land, including 578 acres of upland forest, could be removed, and 65 acres of grassland and 301 acres of maintained grass could be developed, while a total of 1,280 acres would be preserved. Initial disposal of NAS Brunswick under either Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in a short-term reduction of income and employment, which would be mitigated through construction spending and new development. LEGAL MANDATES: Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-510). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0172D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100451, Final EIS (Volume I)-- 488 pages, Appendices (Volume II)--680 pages and maps, November 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 14 KW - Defense Programs KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Buildings KW - Demolition KW - Housing KW - Land Use KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Open Space KW - Property Disposition KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Maine KW - Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine KW - Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873134031?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.title=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, BRAC Program Management Office Northeast, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. [Part 5 of 17] T2 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. AN - 873130706; 14721-1_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The disposal and reuse of Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine (NAS Brunswick) in accordance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, as amended in 2005, are proposed. In addition to the NAS Brunswick property, the disposal and reuse of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and Sabino Hill Rake Station are also proposed. NAS Brunswick is situated on 3,137 acres in the town of Brunswick, Cumberland County, Maine. The facility is approximately 27 miles northeast of Portland and 31 miles south of Augusta. The main gate is located on Bath Road, two miles east of the downtown Brunswick business district. NAS Brunswick is a multi-functional military installation that has evolved over many years to serve various missions. The installation is divided into several distinct land uses and its two active 8,000-foot runways and associated aviation infrastructure are the principal land use features. The built environment consists of a variety of buildings, including aviation support facilities, administrative and training areas, recreation and retail establishments, medical facilities, storage areas, and housing. Construction of these facilities spans from the 1940s to the present day. Two reuse alternatives and a No Action Alternative are considered in this final EIS. Under the No Action Alternative, the U.S. government would retain the NAS Brunswick property in caretaker status. Alternative 1, which is the preferred alternative, would involve reusing the property in a manner consistent with the Brunswick Naval Air Station Reuse Master Plan. Full build-out would be implemented over a 20-year period with development of 1,630 acres resulting in a maximum of 2,946 housing units. In addition, 1,570 acres would be dedicated to a variety of active and passive uses, including recreation, open space, and natural areas. This alternative is based upon reuse of the existing airfield and its supporting infrastructure, a mix of land use types and densities, and the preservation of open space and natural areas. Under Alternative 1, the McKeen Street Housing Annex would remain residential, and the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site would be utilized as recreational, open space, and natural areas. The Sabino Hill Rake Station property would be utilized for parks and recreation. Alternative 2 would consist of a higher density of residential and mixed-use development and no reuse of the airfield. Full build-out of Alternative 2 would be implemented in stages over a 20-year period and would involve development of 1,580 acres resulting in a maximum of 8,220 housing units. Approximately 1,620 acres would be dedicated to active and passive recreation, open spaces, and natural areas. The reuse of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and the Sabino Hill Rake Station properties would be the same under Alternative 1 and Alternative 2. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in an increase in recreational, open space, conservation, and natural areas. Reuse of the installation would provide opportunities for economic development, job creation, and new property tax revenue for the Town of Brunswick. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: At full build-out under Alternative 1, 1,146 acres of undeveloped land, including 690 acres of upland forest, could be affected, and 25 acres of grassland and 50 acres of maintained grass could be developed. A total of 1,060 acres would be preserved. Under Alternative 2, 1,068 acres of undeveloped land, including 578 acres of upland forest, could be removed, and 65 acres of grassland and 301 acres of maintained grass could be developed, while a total of 1,280 acres would be preserved. Initial disposal of NAS Brunswick under either Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in a short-term reduction of income and employment, which would be mitigated through construction spending and new development. LEGAL MANDATES: Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-510). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0172D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100451, Final EIS (Volume I)-- 488 pages, Appendices (Volume II)--680 pages and maps, November 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Defense Programs KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Buildings KW - Demolition KW - Housing KW - Land Use KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Open Space KW - Property Disposition KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Maine KW - Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine KW - Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130706?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.title=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, BRAC Program Management Office Northeast, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. [Part 4 of 17] T2 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. AN - 873130692; 14721-1_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The disposal and reuse of Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine (NAS Brunswick) in accordance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, as amended in 2005, are proposed. In addition to the NAS Brunswick property, the disposal and reuse of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and Sabino Hill Rake Station are also proposed. NAS Brunswick is situated on 3,137 acres in the town of Brunswick, Cumberland County, Maine. The facility is approximately 27 miles northeast of Portland and 31 miles south of Augusta. The main gate is located on Bath Road, two miles east of the downtown Brunswick business district. NAS Brunswick is a multi-functional military installation that has evolved over many years to serve various missions. The installation is divided into several distinct land uses and its two active 8,000-foot runways and associated aviation infrastructure are the principal land use features. The built environment consists of a variety of buildings, including aviation support facilities, administrative and training areas, recreation and retail establishments, medical facilities, storage areas, and housing. Construction of these facilities spans from the 1940s to the present day. Two reuse alternatives and a No Action Alternative are considered in this final EIS. Under the No Action Alternative, the U.S. government would retain the NAS Brunswick property in caretaker status. Alternative 1, which is the preferred alternative, would involve reusing the property in a manner consistent with the Brunswick Naval Air Station Reuse Master Plan. Full build-out would be implemented over a 20-year period with development of 1,630 acres resulting in a maximum of 2,946 housing units. In addition, 1,570 acres would be dedicated to a variety of active and passive uses, including recreation, open space, and natural areas. This alternative is based upon reuse of the existing airfield and its supporting infrastructure, a mix of land use types and densities, and the preservation of open space and natural areas. Under Alternative 1, the McKeen Street Housing Annex would remain residential, and the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site would be utilized as recreational, open space, and natural areas. The Sabino Hill Rake Station property would be utilized for parks and recreation. Alternative 2 would consist of a higher density of residential and mixed-use development and no reuse of the airfield. Full build-out of Alternative 2 would be implemented in stages over a 20-year period and would involve development of 1,580 acres resulting in a maximum of 8,220 housing units. Approximately 1,620 acres would be dedicated to active and passive recreation, open spaces, and natural areas. The reuse of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and the Sabino Hill Rake Station properties would be the same under Alternative 1 and Alternative 2. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in an increase in recreational, open space, conservation, and natural areas. Reuse of the installation would provide opportunities for economic development, job creation, and new property tax revenue for the Town of Brunswick. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: At full build-out under Alternative 1, 1,146 acres of undeveloped land, including 690 acres of upland forest, could be affected, and 25 acres of grassland and 50 acres of maintained grass could be developed. A total of 1,060 acres would be preserved. Under Alternative 2, 1,068 acres of undeveloped land, including 578 acres of upland forest, could be removed, and 65 acres of grassland and 301 acres of maintained grass could be developed, while a total of 1,280 acres would be preserved. Initial disposal of NAS Brunswick under either Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in a short-term reduction of income and employment, which would be mitigated through construction spending and new development. LEGAL MANDATES: Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-510). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0172D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100451, Final EIS (Volume I)-- 488 pages, Appendices (Volume II)--680 pages and maps, November 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Defense Programs KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Buildings KW - Demolition KW - Housing KW - Land Use KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Open Space KW - Property Disposition KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Maine KW - Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine KW - Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130692?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.title=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, BRAC Program Management Office Northeast, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. [Part 3 of 17] T2 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. AN - 873130685; 14721-1_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The disposal and reuse of Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine (NAS Brunswick) in accordance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, as amended in 2005, are proposed. In addition to the NAS Brunswick property, the disposal and reuse of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and Sabino Hill Rake Station are also proposed. NAS Brunswick is situated on 3,137 acres in the town of Brunswick, Cumberland County, Maine. The facility is approximately 27 miles northeast of Portland and 31 miles south of Augusta. The main gate is located on Bath Road, two miles east of the downtown Brunswick business district. NAS Brunswick is a multi-functional military installation that has evolved over many years to serve various missions. The installation is divided into several distinct land uses and its two active 8,000-foot runways and associated aviation infrastructure are the principal land use features. The built environment consists of a variety of buildings, including aviation support facilities, administrative and training areas, recreation and retail establishments, medical facilities, storage areas, and housing. Construction of these facilities spans from the 1940s to the present day. Two reuse alternatives and a No Action Alternative are considered in this final EIS. Under the No Action Alternative, the U.S. government would retain the NAS Brunswick property in caretaker status. Alternative 1, which is the preferred alternative, would involve reusing the property in a manner consistent with the Brunswick Naval Air Station Reuse Master Plan. Full build-out would be implemented over a 20-year period with development of 1,630 acres resulting in a maximum of 2,946 housing units. In addition, 1,570 acres would be dedicated to a variety of active and passive uses, including recreation, open space, and natural areas. This alternative is based upon reuse of the existing airfield and its supporting infrastructure, a mix of land use types and densities, and the preservation of open space and natural areas. Under Alternative 1, the McKeen Street Housing Annex would remain residential, and the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site would be utilized as recreational, open space, and natural areas. The Sabino Hill Rake Station property would be utilized for parks and recreation. Alternative 2 would consist of a higher density of residential and mixed-use development and no reuse of the airfield. Full build-out of Alternative 2 would be implemented in stages over a 20-year period and would involve development of 1,580 acres resulting in a maximum of 8,220 housing units. Approximately 1,620 acres would be dedicated to active and passive recreation, open spaces, and natural areas. The reuse of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and the Sabino Hill Rake Station properties would be the same under Alternative 1 and Alternative 2. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in an increase in recreational, open space, conservation, and natural areas. Reuse of the installation would provide opportunities for economic development, job creation, and new property tax revenue for the Town of Brunswick. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: At full build-out under Alternative 1, 1,146 acres of undeveloped land, including 690 acres of upland forest, could be affected, and 25 acres of grassland and 50 acres of maintained grass could be developed. A total of 1,060 acres would be preserved. Under Alternative 2, 1,068 acres of undeveloped land, including 578 acres of upland forest, could be removed, and 65 acres of grassland and 301 acres of maintained grass could be developed, while a total of 1,280 acres would be preserved. Initial disposal of NAS Brunswick under either Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in a short-term reduction of income and employment, which would be mitigated through construction spending and new development. LEGAL MANDATES: Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-510). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0172D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100451, Final EIS (Volume I)-- 488 pages, Appendices (Volume II)--680 pages and maps, November 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Defense Programs KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Buildings KW - Demolition KW - Housing KW - Land Use KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Open Space KW - Property Disposition KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Maine KW - Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine KW - Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130685?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.title=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, BRAC Program Management Office Northeast, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. [Part 2 of 17] T2 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. AN - 873130679; 14721-1_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The disposal and reuse of Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine (NAS Brunswick) in accordance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, as amended in 2005, are proposed. In addition to the NAS Brunswick property, the disposal and reuse of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and Sabino Hill Rake Station are also proposed. NAS Brunswick is situated on 3,137 acres in the town of Brunswick, Cumberland County, Maine. The facility is approximately 27 miles northeast of Portland and 31 miles south of Augusta. The main gate is located on Bath Road, two miles east of the downtown Brunswick business district. NAS Brunswick is a multi-functional military installation that has evolved over many years to serve various missions. The installation is divided into several distinct land uses and its two active 8,000-foot runways and associated aviation infrastructure are the principal land use features. The built environment consists of a variety of buildings, including aviation support facilities, administrative and training areas, recreation and retail establishments, medical facilities, storage areas, and housing. Construction of these facilities spans from the 1940s to the present day. Two reuse alternatives and a No Action Alternative are considered in this final EIS. Under the No Action Alternative, the U.S. government would retain the NAS Brunswick property in caretaker status. Alternative 1, which is the preferred alternative, would involve reusing the property in a manner consistent with the Brunswick Naval Air Station Reuse Master Plan. Full build-out would be implemented over a 20-year period with development of 1,630 acres resulting in a maximum of 2,946 housing units. In addition, 1,570 acres would be dedicated to a variety of active and passive uses, including recreation, open space, and natural areas. This alternative is based upon reuse of the existing airfield and its supporting infrastructure, a mix of land use types and densities, and the preservation of open space and natural areas. Under Alternative 1, the McKeen Street Housing Annex would remain residential, and the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site would be utilized as recreational, open space, and natural areas. The Sabino Hill Rake Station property would be utilized for parks and recreation. Alternative 2 would consist of a higher density of residential and mixed-use development and no reuse of the airfield. Full build-out of Alternative 2 would be implemented in stages over a 20-year period and would involve development of 1,580 acres resulting in a maximum of 8,220 housing units. Approximately 1,620 acres would be dedicated to active and passive recreation, open spaces, and natural areas. The reuse of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and the Sabino Hill Rake Station properties would be the same under Alternative 1 and Alternative 2. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in an increase in recreational, open space, conservation, and natural areas. Reuse of the installation would provide opportunities for economic development, job creation, and new property tax revenue for the Town of Brunswick. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: At full build-out under Alternative 1, 1,146 acres of undeveloped land, including 690 acres of upland forest, could be affected, and 25 acres of grassland and 50 acres of maintained grass could be developed. A total of 1,060 acres would be preserved. Under Alternative 2, 1,068 acres of undeveloped land, including 578 acres of upland forest, could be removed, and 65 acres of grassland and 301 acres of maintained grass could be developed, while a total of 1,280 acres would be preserved. Initial disposal of NAS Brunswick under either Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in a short-term reduction of income and employment, which would be mitigated through construction spending and new development. LEGAL MANDATES: Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-510). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0172D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100451, Final EIS (Volume I)-- 488 pages, Appendices (Volume II)--680 pages and maps, November 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Defense Programs KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Buildings KW - Demolition KW - Housing KW - Land Use KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Open Space KW - Property Disposition KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Maine KW - Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine KW - Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130679?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.title=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, BRAC Program Management Office Northeast, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. [Part 1 of 17] T2 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. AN - 873130650; 14721-1_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The disposal and reuse of Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine (NAS Brunswick) in accordance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, as amended in 2005, are proposed. In addition to the NAS Brunswick property, the disposal and reuse of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and Sabino Hill Rake Station are also proposed. NAS Brunswick is situated on 3,137 acres in the town of Brunswick, Cumberland County, Maine. The facility is approximately 27 miles northeast of Portland and 31 miles south of Augusta. The main gate is located on Bath Road, two miles east of the downtown Brunswick business district. NAS Brunswick is a multi-functional military installation that has evolved over many years to serve various missions. The installation is divided into several distinct land uses and its two active 8,000-foot runways and associated aviation infrastructure are the principal land use features. The built environment consists of a variety of buildings, including aviation support facilities, administrative and training areas, recreation and retail establishments, medical facilities, storage areas, and housing. Construction of these facilities spans from the 1940s to the present day. Two reuse alternatives and a No Action Alternative are considered in this final EIS. Under the No Action Alternative, the U.S. government would retain the NAS Brunswick property in caretaker status. Alternative 1, which is the preferred alternative, would involve reusing the property in a manner consistent with the Brunswick Naval Air Station Reuse Master Plan. Full build-out would be implemented over a 20-year period with development of 1,630 acres resulting in a maximum of 2,946 housing units. In addition, 1,570 acres would be dedicated to a variety of active and passive uses, including recreation, open space, and natural areas. This alternative is based upon reuse of the existing airfield and its supporting infrastructure, a mix of land use types and densities, and the preservation of open space and natural areas. Under Alternative 1, the McKeen Street Housing Annex would remain residential, and the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site would be utilized as recreational, open space, and natural areas. The Sabino Hill Rake Station property would be utilized for parks and recreation. Alternative 2 would consist of a higher density of residential and mixed-use development and no reuse of the airfield. Full build-out of Alternative 2 would be implemented in stages over a 20-year period and would involve development of 1,580 acres resulting in a maximum of 8,220 housing units. Approximately 1,620 acres would be dedicated to active and passive recreation, open spaces, and natural areas. The reuse of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and the Sabino Hill Rake Station properties would be the same under Alternative 1 and Alternative 2. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in an increase in recreational, open space, conservation, and natural areas. Reuse of the installation would provide opportunities for economic development, job creation, and new property tax revenue for the Town of Brunswick. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: At full build-out under Alternative 1, 1,146 acres of undeveloped land, including 690 acres of upland forest, could be affected, and 25 acres of grassland and 50 acres of maintained grass could be developed. A total of 1,060 acres would be preserved. Under Alternative 2, 1,068 acres of undeveloped land, including 578 acres of upland forest, could be removed, and 65 acres of grassland and 301 acres of maintained grass could be developed, while a total of 1,280 acres would be preserved. Initial disposal of NAS Brunswick under either Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in a short-term reduction of income and employment, which would be mitigated through construction spending and new development. LEGAL MANDATES: Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-510). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0172D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100451, Final EIS (Volume I)-- 488 pages, Appendices (Volume II)--680 pages and maps, November 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Defense Programs KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Buildings KW - Demolition KW - Housing KW - Land Use KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Open Space KW - Property Disposition KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Maine KW - Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine KW - Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130650?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.title=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, BRAC Program Management Office Northeast, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. [Part 13 of 17] T2 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. AN - 873130367; 14721-1_0013 AB - PURPOSE: The disposal and reuse of Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine (NAS Brunswick) in accordance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, as amended in 2005, are proposed. In addition to the NAS Brunswick property, the disposal and reuse of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and Sabino Hill Rake Station are also proposed. NAS Brunswick is situated on 3,137 acres in the town of Brunswick, Cumberland County, Maine. The facility is approximately 27 miles northeast of Portland and 31 miles south of Augusta. The main gate is located on Bath Road, two miles east of the downtown Brunswick business district. NAS Brunswick is a multi-functional military installation that has evolved over many years to serve various missions. The installation is divided into several distinct land uses and its two active 8,000-foot runways and associated aviation infrastructure are the principal land use features. The built environment consists of a variety of buildings, including aviation support facilities, administrative and training areas, recreation and retail establishments, medical facilities, storage areas, and housing. Construction of these facilities spans from the 1940s to the present day. Two reuse alternatives and a No Action Alternative are considered in this final EIS. Under the No Action Alternative, the U.S. government would retain the NAS Brunswick property in caretaker status. Alternative 1, which is the preferred alternative, would involve reusing the property in a manner consistent with the Brunswick Naval Air Station Reuse Master Plan. Full build-out would be implemented over a 20-year period with development of 1,630 acres resulting in a maximum of 2,946 housing units. In addition, 1,570 acres would be dedicated to a variety of active and passive uses, including recreation, open space, and natural areas. This alternative is based upon reuse of the existing airfield and its supporting infrastructure, a mix of land use types and densities, and the preservation of open space and natural areas. Under Alternative 1, the McKeen Street Housing Annex would remain residential, and the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site would be utilized as recreational, open space, and natural areas. The Sabino Hill Rake Station property would be utilized for parks and recreation. Alternative 2 would consist of a higher density of residential and mixed-use development and no reuse of the airfield. Full build-out of Alternative 2 would be implemented in stages over a 20-year period and would involve development of 1,580 acres resulting in a maximum of 8,220 housing units. Approximately 1,620 acres would be dedicated to active and passive recreation, open spaces, and natural areas. The reuse of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and the Sabino Hill Rake Station properties would be the same under Alternative 1 and Alternative 2. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in an increase in recreational, open space, conservation, and natural areas. Reuse of the installation would provide opportunities for economic development, job creation, and new property tax revenue for the Town of Brunswick. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: At full build-out under Alternative 1, 1,146 acres of undeveloped land, including 690 acres of upland forest, could be affected, and 25 acres of grassland and 50 acres of maintained grass could be developed. A total of 1,060 acres would be preserved. Under Alternative 2, 1,068 acres of undeveloped land, including 578 acres of upland forest, could be removed, and 65 acres of grassland and 301 acres of maintained grass could be developed, while a total of 1,280 acres would be preserved. Initial disposal of NAS Brunswick under either Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in a short-term reduction of income and employment, which would be mitigated through construction spending and new development. LEGAL MANDATES: Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-510). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0172D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100451, Final EIS (Volume I)-- 488 pages, Appendices (Volume II)--680 pages and maps, November 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 13 KW - Defense Programs KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Buildings KW - Demolition KW - Housing KW - Land Use KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Open Space KW - Property Disposition KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Maine KW - Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine KW - Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130367?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.title=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, BRAC Program Management Office Northeast, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. [Part 12 of 17] T2 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. AN - 873130358; 14721-1_0012 AB - PURPOSE: The disposal and reuse of Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine (NAS Brunswick) in accordance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, as amended in 2005, are proposed. In addition to the NAS Brunswick property, the disposal and reuse of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and Sabino Hill Rake Station are also proposed. NAS Brunswick is situated on 3,137 acres in the town of Brunswick, Cumberland County, Maine. The facility is approximately 27 miles northeast of Portland and 31 miles south of Augusta. The main gate is located on Bath Road, two miles east of the downtown Brunswick business district. NAS Brunswick is a multi-functional military installation that has evolved over many years to serve various missions. The installation is divided into several distinct land uses and its two active 8,000-foot runways and associated aviation infrastructure are the principal land use features. The built environment consists of a variety of buildings, including aviation support facilities, administrative and training areas, recreation and retail establishments, medical facilities, storage areas, and housing. Construction of these facilities spans from the 1940s to the present day. Two reuse alternatives and a No Action Alternative are considered in this final EIS. Under the No Action Alternative, the U.S. government would retain the NAS Brunswick property in caretaker status. Alternative 1, which is the preferred alternative, would involve reusing the property in a manner consistent with the Brunswick Naval Air Station Reuse Master Plan. Full build-out would be implemented over a 20-year period with development of 1,630 acres resulting in a maximum of 2,946 housing units. In addition, 1,570 acres would be dedicated to a variety of active and passive uses, including recreation, open space, and natural areas. This alternative is based upon reuse of the existing airfield and its supporting infrastructure, a mix of land use types and densities, and the preservation of open space and natural areas. Under Alternative 1, the McKeen Street Housing Annex would remain residential, and the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site would be utilized as recreational, open space, and natural areas. The Sabino Hill Rake Station property would be utilized for parks and recreation. Alternative 2 would consist of a higher density of residential and mixed-use development and no reuse of the airfield. Full build-out of Alternative 2 would be implemented in stages over a 20-year period and would involve development of 1,580 acres resulting in a maximum of 8,220 housing units. Approximately 1,620 acres would be dedicated to active and passive recreation, open spaces, and natural areas. The reuse of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and the Sabino Hill Rake Station properties would be the same under Alternative 1 and Alternative 2. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in an increase in recreational, open space, conservation, and natural areas. Reuse of the installation would provide opportunities for economic development, job creation, and new property tax revenue for the Town of Brunswick. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: At full build-out under Alternative 1, 1,146 acres of undeveloped land, including 690 acres of upland forest, could be affected, and 25 acres of grassland and 50 acres of maintained grass could be developed. A total of 1,060 acres would be preserved. Under Alternative 2, 1,068 acres of undeveloped land, including 578 acres of upland forest, could be removed, and 65 acres of grassland and 301 acres of maintained grass could be developed, while a total of 1,280 acres would be preserved. Initial disposal of NAS Brunswick under either Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in a short-term reduction of income and employment, which would be mitigated through construction spending and new development. LEGAL MANDATES: Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-510). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0172D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100451, Final EIS (Volume I)-- 488 pages, Appendices (Volume II)--680 pages and maps, November 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 12 KW - Defense Programs KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Buildings KW - Demolition KW - Housing KW - Land Use KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Open Space KW - Property Disposition KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Maine KW - Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine KW - Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130358?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.title=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, BRAC Program Management Office Northeast, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. [Part 11 of 17] T2 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. AN - 873130353; 14721-1_0011 AB - PURPOSE: The disposal and reuse of Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine (NAS Brunswick) in accordance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, as amended in 2005, are proposed. In addition to the NAS Brunswick property, the disposal and reuse of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and Sabino Hill Rake Station are also proposed. NAS Brunswick is situated on 3,137 acres in the town of Brunswick, Cumberland County, Maine. The facility is approximately 27 miles northeast of Portland and 31 miles south of Augusta. The main gate is located on Bath Road, two miles east of the downtown Brunswick business district. NAS Brunswick is a multi-functional military installation that has evolved over many years to serve various missions. The installation is divided into several distinct land uses and its two active 8,000-foot runways and associated aviation infrastructure are the principal land use features. The built environment consists of a variety of buildings, including aviation support facilities, administrative and training areas, recreation and retail establishments, medical facilities, storage areas, and housing. Construction of these facilities spans from the 1940s to the present day. Two reuse alternatives and a No Action Alternative are considered in this final EIS. Under the No Action Alternative, the U.S. government would retain the NAS Brunswick property in caretaker status. Alternative 1, which is the preferred alternative, would involve reusing the property in a manner consistent with the Brunswick Naval Air Station Reuse Master Plan. Full build-out would be implemented over a 20-year period with development of 1,630 acres resulting in a maximum of 2,946 housing units. In addition, 1,570 acres would be dedicated to a variety of active and passive uses, including recreation, open space, and natural areas. This alternative is based upon reuse of the existing airfield and its supporting infrastructure, a mix of land use types and densities, and the preservation of open space and natural areas. Under Alternative 1, the McKeen Street Housing Annex would remain residential, and the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site would be utilized as recreational, open space, and natural areas. The Sabino Hill Rake Station property would be utilized for parks and recreation. Alternative 2 would consist of a higher density of residential and mixed-use development and no reuse of the airfield. Full build-out of Alternative 2 would be implemented in stages over a 20-year period and would involve development of 1,580 acres resulting in a maximum of 8,220 housing units. Approximately 1,620 acres would be dedicated to active and passive recreation, open spaces, and natural areas. The reuse of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and the Sabino Hill Rake Station properties would be the same under Alternative 1 and Alternative 2. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in an increase in recreational, open space, conservation, and natural areas. Reuse of the installation would provide opportunities for economic development, job creation, and new property tax revenue for the Town of Brunswick. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: At full build-out under Alternative 1, 1,146 acres of undeveloped land, including 690 acres of upland forest, could be affected, and 25 acres of grassland and 50 acres of maintained grass could be developed. A total of 1,060 acres would be preserved. Under Alternative 2, 1,068 acres of undeveloped land, including 578 acres of upland forest, could be removed, and 65 acres of grassland and 301 acres of maintained grass could be developed, while a total of 1,280 acres would be preserved. Initial disposal of NAS Brunswick under either Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in a short-term reduction of income and employment, which would be mitigated through construction spending and new development. LEGAL MANDATES: Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-510). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0172D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100451, Final EIS (Volume I)-- 488 pages, Appendices (Volume II)--680 pages and maps, November 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 11 KW - Defense Programs KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Buildings KW - Demolition KW - Housing KW - Land Use KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Open Space KW - Property Disposition KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Maine KW - Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine KW - Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130353?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.title=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, BRAC Program Management Office Northeast, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. [Part 10 of 17] T2 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. AN - 873130346; 14721-1_0010 AB - PURPOSE: The disposal and reuse of Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine (NAS Brunswick) in accordance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, as amended in 2005, are proposed. In addition to the NAS Brunswick property, the disposal and reuse of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and Sabino Hill Rake Station are also proposed. NAS Brunswick is situated on 3,137 acres in the town of Brunswick, Cumberland County, Maine. The facility is approximately 27 miles northeast of Portland and 31 miles south of Augusta. The main gate is located on Bath Road, two miles east of the downtown Brunswick business district. NAS Brunswick is a multi-functional military installation that has evolved over many years to serve various missions. The installation is divided into several distinct land uses and its two active 8,000-foot runways and associated aviation infrastructure are the principal land use features. The built environment consists of a variety of buildings, including aviation support facilities, administrative and training areas, recreation and retail establishments, medical facilities, storage areas, and housing. Construction of these facilities spans from the 1940s to the present day. Two reuse alternatives and a No Action Alternative are considered in this final EIS. Under the No Action Alternative, the U.S. government would retain the NAS Brunswick property in caretaker status. Alternative 1, which is the preferred alternative, would involve reusing the property in a manner consistent with the Brunswick Naval Air Station Reuse Master Plan. Full build-out would be implemented over a 20-year period with development of 1,630 acres resulting in a maximum of 2,946 housing units. In addition, 1,570 acres would be dedicated to a variety of active and passive uses, including recreation, open space, and natural areas. This alternative is based upon reuse of the existing airfield and its supporting infrastructure, a mix of land use types and densities, and the preservation of open space and natural areas. Under Alternative 1, the McKeen Street Housing Annex would remain residential, and the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site would be utilized as recreational, open space, and natural areas. The Sabino Hill Rake Station property would be utilized for parks and recreation. Alternative 2 would consist of a higher density of residential and mixed-use development and no reuse of the airfield. Full build-out of Alternative 2 would be implemented in stages over a 20-year period and would involve development of 1,580 acres resulting in a maximum of 8,220 housing units. Approximately 1,620 acres would be dedicated to active and passive recreation, open spaces, and natural areas. The reuse of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and the Sabino Hill Rake Station properties would be the same under Alternative 1 and Alternative 2. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in an increase in recreational, open space, conservation, and natural areas. Reuse of the installation would provide opportunities for economic development, job creation, and new property tax revenue for the Town of Brunswick. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: At full build-out under Alternative 1, 1,146 acres of undeveloped land, including 690 acres of upland forest, could be affected, and 25 acres of grassland and 50 acres of maintained grass could be developed. A total of 1,060 acres would be preserved. Under Alternative 2, 1,068 acres of undeveloped land, including 578 acres of upland forest, could be removed, and 65 acres of grassland and 301 acres of maintained grass could be developed, while a total of 1,280 acres would be preserved. Initial disposal of NAS Brunswick under either Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in a short-term reduction of income and employment, which would be mitigated through construction spending and new development. LEGAL MANDATES: Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-510). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0172D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100451, Final EIS (Volume I)-- 488 pages, Appendices (Volume II)--680 pages and maps, November 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 10 KW - Defense Programs KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Buildings KW - Demolition KW - Housing KW - Land Use KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Open Space KW - Property Disposition KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Maine KW - Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine KW - Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130346?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.title=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, BRAC Program Management Office Northeast, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. [Part 9 of 17] T2 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. AN - 873130339; 14721-1_0009 AB - PURPOSE: The disposal and reuse of Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine (NAS Brunswick) in accordance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, as amended in 2005, are proposed. In addition to the NAS Brunswick property, the disposal and reuse of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and Sabino Hill Rake Station are also proposed. NAS Brunswick is situated on 3,137 acres in the town of Brunswick, Cumberland County, Maine. The facility is approximately 27 miles northeast of Portland and 31 miles south of Augusta. The main gate is located on Bath Road, two miles east of the downtown Brunswick business district. NAS Brunswick is a multi-functional military installation that has evolved over many years to serve various missions. The installation is divided into several distinct land uses and its two active 8,000-foot runways and associated aviation infrastructure are the principal land use features. The built environment consists of a variety of buildings, including aviation support facilities, administrative and training areas, recreation and retail establishments, medical facilities, storage areas, and housing. Construction of these facilities spans from the 1940s to the present day. Two reuse alternatives and a No Action Alternative are considered in this final EIS. Under the No Action Alternative, the U.S. government would retain the NAS Brunswick property in caretaker status. Alternative 1, which is the preferred alternative, would involve reusing the property in a manner consistent with the Brunswick Naval Air Station Reuse Master Plan. Full build-out would be implemented over a 20-year period with development of 1,630 acres resulting in a maximum of 2,946 housing units. In addition, 1,570 acres would be dedicated to a variety of active and passive uses, including recreation, open space, and natural areas. This alternative is based upon reuse of the existing airfield and its supporting infrastructure, a mix of land use types and densities, and the preservation of open space and natural areas. Under Alternative 1, the McKeen Street Housing Annex would remain residential, and the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site would be utilized as recreational, open space, and natural areas. The Sabino Hill Rake Station property would be utilized for parks and recreation. Alternative 2 would consist of a higher density of residential and mixed-use development and no reuse of the airfield. Full build-out of Alternative 2 would be implemented in stages over a 20-year period and would involve development of 1,580 acres resulting in a maximum of 8,220 housing units. Approximately 1,620 acres would be dedicated to active and passive recreation, open spaces, and natural areas. The reuse of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and the Sabino Hill Rake Station properties would be the same under Alternative 1 and Alternative 2. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in an increase in recreational, open space, conservation, and natural areas. Reuse of the installation would provide opportunities for economic development, job creation, and new property tax revenue for the Town of Brunswick. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: At full build-out under Alternative 1, 1,146 acres of undeveloped land, including 690 acres of upland forest, could be affected, and 25 acres of grassland and 50 acres of maintained grass could be developed. A total of 1,060 acres would be preserved. Under Alternative 2, 1,068 acres of undeveloped land, including 578 acres of upland forest, could be removed, and 65 acres of grassland and 301 acres of maintained grass could be developed, while a total of 1,280 acres would be preserved. Initial disposal of NAS Brunswick under either Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in a short-term reduction of income and employment, which would be mitigated through construction spending and new development. LEGAL MANDATES: Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-510). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0172D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100451, Final EIS (Volume I)-- 488 pages, Appendices (Volume II)--680 pages and maps, November 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 9 KW - Defense Programs KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Buildings KW - Demolition KW - Housing KW - Land Use KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Open Space KW - Property Disposition KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Maine KW - Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine KW - Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130339?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.title=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, BRAC Program Management Office Northeast, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. [Part 8 of 17] T2 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. AN - 873130329; 14721-1_0008 AB - PURPOSE: The disposal and reuse of Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine (NAS Brunswick) in accordance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, as amended in 2005, are proposed. In addition to the NAS Brunswick property, the disposal and reuse of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and Sabino Hill Rake Station are also proposed. NAS Brunswick is situated on 3,137 acres in the town of Brunswick, Cumberland County, Maine. The facility is approximately 27 miles northeast of Portland and 31 miles south of Augusta. The main gate is located on Bath Road, two miles east of the downtown Brunswick business district. NAS Brunswick is a multi-functional military installation that has evolved over many years to serve various missions. The installation is divided into several distinct land uses and its two active 8,000-foot runways and associated aviation infrastructure are the principal land use features. The built environment consists of a variety of buildings, including aviation support facilities, administrative and training areas, recreation and retail establishments, medical facilities, storage areas, and housing. Construction of these facilities spans from the 1940s to the present day. Two reuse alternatives and a No Action Alternative are considered in this final EIS. Under the No Action Alternative, the U.S. government would retain the NAS Brunswick property in caretaker status. Alternative 1, which is the preferred alternative, would involve reusing the property in a manner consistent with the Brunswick Naval Air Station Reuse Master Plan. Full build-out would be implemented over a 20-year period with development of 1,630 acres resulting in a maximum of 2,946 housing units. In addition, 1,570 acres would be dedicated to a variety of active and passive uses, including recreation, open space, and natural areas. This alternative is based upon reuse of the existing airfield and its supporting infrastructure, a mix of land use types and densities, and the preservation of open space and natural areas. Under Alternative 1, the McKeen Street Housing Annex would remain residential, and the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site would be utilized as recreational, open space, and natural areas. The Sabino Hill Rake Station property would be utilized for parks and recreation. Alternative 2 would consist of a higher density of residential and mixed-use development and no reuse of the airfield. Full build-out of Alternative 2 would be implemented in stages over a 20-year period and would involve development of 1,580 acres resulting in a maximum of 8,220 housing units. Approximately 1,620 acres would be dedicated to active and passive recreation, open spaces, and natural areas. The reuse of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and the Sabino Hill Rake Station properties would be the same under Alternative 1 and Alternative 2. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in an increase in recreational, open space, conservation, and natural areas. Reuse of the installation would provide opportunities for economic development, job creation, and new property tax revenue for the Town of Brunswick. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: At full build-out under Alternative 1, 1,146 acres of undeveloped land, including 690 acres of upland forest, could be affected, and 25 acres of grassland and 50 acres of maintained grass could be developed. A total of 1,060 acres would be preserved. Under Alternative 2, 1,068 acres of undeveloped land, including 578 acres of upland forest, could be removed, and 65 acres of grassland and 301 acres of maintained grass could be developed, while a total of 1,280 acres would be preserved. Initial disposal of NAS Brunswick under either Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in a short-term reduction of income and employment, which would be mitigated through construction spending and new development. LEGAL MANDATES: Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-510). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0172D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100451, Final EIS (Volume I)-- 488 pages, Appendices (Volume II)--680 pages and maps, November 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 8 KW - Defense Programs KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Buildings KW - Demolition KW - Housing KW - Land Use KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Open Space KW - Property Disposition KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Maine KW - Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine KW - Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130329?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.title=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, BRAC Program Management Office Northeast, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. [Part 7 of 17] T2 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. AN - 873130324; 14721-1_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The disposal and reuse of Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine (NAS Brunswick) in accordance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, as amended in 2005, are proposed. In addition to the NAS Brunswick property, the disposal and reuse of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and Sabino Hill Rake Station are also proposed. NAS Brunswick is situated on 3,137 acres in the town of Brunswick, Cumberland County, Maine. The facility is approximately 27 miles northeast of Portland and 31 miles south of Augusta. The main gate is located on Bath Road, two miles east of the downtown Brunswick business district. NAS Brunswick is a multi-functional military installation that has evolved over many years to serve various missions. The installation is divided into several distinct land uses and its two active 8,000-foot runways and associated aviation infrastructure are the principal land use features. The built environment consists of a variety of buildings, including aviation support facilities, administrative and training areas, recreation and retail establishments, medical facilities, storage areas, and housing. Construction of these facilities spans from the 1940s to the present day. Two reuse alternatives and a No Action Alternative are considered in this final EIS. Under the No Action Alternative, the U.S. government would retain the NAS Brunswick property in caretaker status. Alternative 1, which is the preferred alternative, would involve reusing the property in a manner consistent with the Brunswick Naval Air Station Reuse Master Plan. Full build-out would be implemented over a 20-year period with development of 1,630 acres resulting in a maximum of 2,946 housing units. In addition, 1,570 acres would be dedicated to a variety of active and passive uses, including recreation, open space, and natural areas. This alternative is based upon reuse of the existing airfield and its supporting infrastructure, a mix of land use types and densities, and the preservation of open space and natural areas. Under Alternative 1, the McKeen Street Housing Annex would remain residential, and the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site would be utilized as recreational, open space, and natural areas. The Sabino Hill Rake Station property would be utilized for parks and recreation. Alternative 2 would consist of a higher density of residential and mixed-use development and no reuse of the airfield. Full build-out of Alternative 2 would be implemented in stages over a 20-year period and would involve development of 1,580 acres resulting in a maximum of 8,220 housing units. Approximately 1,620 acres would be dedicated to active and passive recreation, open spaces, and natural areas. The reuse of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and the Sabino Hill Rake Station properties would be the same under Alternative 1 and Alternative 2. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in an increase in recreational, open space, conservation, and natural areas. Reuse of the installation would provide opportunities for economic development, job creation, and new property tax revenue for the Town of Brunswick. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: At full build-out under Alternative 1, 1,146 acres of undeveloped land, including 690 acres of upland forest, could be affected, and 25 acres of grassland and 50 acres of maintained grass could be developed. A total of 1,060 acres would be preserved. Under Alternative 2, 1,068 acres of undeveloped land, including 578 acres of upland forest, could be removed, and 65 acres of grassland and 301 acres of maintained grass could be developed, while a total of 1,280 acres would be preserved. Initial disposal of NAS Brunswick under either Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in a short-term reduction of income and employment, which would be mitigated through construction spending and new development. LEGAL MANDATES: Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-510). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0172D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100451, Final EIS (Volume I)-- 488 pages, Appendices (Volume II)--680 pages and maps, November 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 7 KW - Defense Programs KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Buildings KW - Demolition KW - Housing KW - Land Use KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Open Space KW - Property Disposition KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Maine KW - Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine KW - Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130324?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.title=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, BRAC Program Management Office Northeast, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. [Part 6 of 17] T2 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. AN - 873130312; 14721-1_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The disposal and reuse of Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine (NAS Brunswick) in accordance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, as amended in 2005, are proposed. In addition to the NAS Brunswick property, the disposal and reuse of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and Sabino Hill Rake Station are also proposed. NAS Brunswick is situated on 3,137 acres in the town of Brunswick, Cumberland County, Maine. The facility is approximately 27 miles northeast of Portland and 31 miles south of Augusta. The main gate is located on Bath Road, two miles east of the downtown Brunswick business district. NAS Brunswick is a multi-functional military installation that has evolved over many years to serve various missions. The installation is divided into several distinct land uses and its two active 8,000-foot runways and associated aviation infrastructure are the principal land use features. The built environment consists of a variety of buildings, including aviation support facilities, administrative and training areas, recreation and retail establishments, medical facilities, storage areas, and housing. Construction of these facilities spans from the 1940s to the present day. Two reuse alternatives and a No Action Alternative are considered in this final EIS. Under the No Action Alternative, the U.S. government would retain the NAS Brunswick property in caretaker status. Alternative 1, which is the preferred alternative, would involve reusing the property in a manner consistent with the Brunswick Naval Air Station Reuse Master Plan. Full build-out would be implemented over a 20-year period with development of 1,630 acres resulting in a maximum of 2,946 housing units. In addition, 1,570 acres would be dedicated to a variety of active and passive uses, including recreation, open space, and natural areas. This alternative is based upon reuse of the existing airfield and its supporting infrastructure, a mix of land use types and densities, and the preservation of open space and natural areas. Under Alternative 1, the McKeen Street Housing Annex would remain residential, and the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site would be utilized as recreational, open space, and natural areas. The Sabino Hill Rake Station property would be utilized for parks and recreation. Alternative 2 would consist of a higher density of residential and mixed-use development and no reuse of the airfield. Full build-out of Alternative 2 would be implemented in stages over a 20-year period and would involve development of 1,580 acres resulting in a maximum of 8,220 housing units. Approximately 1,620 acres would be dedicated to active and passive recreation, open spaces, and natural areas. The reuse of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and the Sabino Hill Rake Station properties would be the same under Alternative 1 and Alternative 2. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in an increase in recreational, open space, conservation, and natural areas. Reuse of the installation would provide opportunities for economic development, job creation, and new property tax revenue for the Town of Brunswick. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: At full build-out under Alternative 1, 1,146 acres of undeveloped land, including 690 acres of upland forest, could be affected, and 25 acres of grassland and 50 acres of maintained grass could be developed. A total of 1,060 acres would be preserved. Under Alternative 2, 1,068 acres of undeveloped land, including 578 acres of upland forest, could be removed, and 65 acres of grassland and 301 acres of maintained grass could be developed, while a total of 1,280 acres would be preserved. Initial disposal of NAS Brunswick under either Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in a short-term reduction of income and employment, which would be mitigated through construction spending and new development. LEGAL MANDATES: Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-510). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0172D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100451, Final EIS (Volume I)-- 488 pages, Appendices (Volume II)--680 pages and maps, November 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Defense Programs KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Buildings KW - Demolition KW - Housing KW - Land Use KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Open Space KW - Property Disposition KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Maine KW - Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine KW - Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130312?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.title=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, BRAC Program Management Office Northeast, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - FERGUSON SLIDE PERMANENT RESTORATION PROJECT, MARIPOSA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 1 of 1] T2 - FERGUSON SLIDE PERMANENT RESTORATION PROJECT, MARIPOSA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133348; 14716-6_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The restoration of full highway access between Mariposa and El Portal via State Route 140 (SR 140) in Mariposa County, California is proposed. The project would involve repairing or permanently bypassing the 0.7 mile segment of SR 140 that was blocked or damaged by the Ferguson rockslide. Within the limits of the proposed project and prior to the Ferguson rockslide, SR 140 was a two-lane, undivided highway. Since April 2006, rockslides have covered the highway with 798,000 tons of rock and debris closing SR 140 to traffic from eight miles east of Briceburg to 7.6 miles west of El Portal. Following the rockslide and the completion of a temporary detour, SR 140 now bridges the Merced RIver, bypassing the rockslide, as a one-lane road. This bypass route provides for one-directional traffic that is controlled by signalized lights. Six build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. Alternative C would involve construction of an open-cut realignment. The highway would be realigned to the northeast of its current alignment, spanning the Merced River and bypassing the rockslide. SR 140 would cut through the mountain across the Merced River from the rockslide and then span back across the river where it would meet the existing alignment. Two bridges would be built across the river. Alternative T would utilize a tunnel realignment to bypass the rockslide. SR 140 would tunnel 700 feet through the mountain across the Merced River from the rockslide and then span back across the river where it would meet the existing alignment. Two bridges would be built across the river. Under Alternative T-3, a 2,200-foot-long tunnel would be constructed under the area of the slide. Alternative S would realign the highway to the northeast of its current alignment, spanning the Merced River with two bridges and bypassing the rockslide with a hillside viaduct and retaining wall. Alternative S-2 is similar to Alternative S and would realign the highway to the northeast of its current alignment, spanning the Merced River with two bridges and bypassing the rockslide with a hillside viaduct and retaining wall. This alternative differs from Alternative S in that it proposes two bridge type variations along with their own specific roadway alignments. The first (S2-V1) would construct two tied-arch bridges, which use an arch structure with cables above the bridge deck for support. The second (S2-V2) would construct two slant-leg bridges, which use V-shaped columns to support the bridge deck. Alternative R would involve construction of a rockshed (cut-and-cover tunnel) through the talus (foundation layer) of the slide along the existing SR 140 alignment. The removal of rock material would range from 8,300 cubic yards for Alternative S to 320,000 cubic yards for Alternative C. Estimated project costs range from $34.6 for Alternative S to $179.2 million for Alternative T-3. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Permanent restoration of SR 140 would eliminate the detour and provide full access to all types of travelers, ranging from recreational to business, between the town of Mariposa and Yosemite National Park. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities may temporarily and indirectly affect hardhead fish as the soil is stirred up and creates cloudiness within the river. All the build alternatives would remove potential bat foraging and roosting habitat. Alternatives R and T-3 would remove 2.10 acres and 0.45 acre of limestone salamander habitat, respectively, resulting in the likely take of the animal itself. Alternatives R and T-3 would cut into the slopes on the south side of the river impacting habitat for the special-status plant species Tompkins sedge, Mariposa clarkia, Merced clarkia, and smallflower monkeyflower. Alternatives C, T, and S would impede the free-flowing nature of the Wild and Scenic-designated Merced River by constructing bridge piers within the wild and scenic river boundaries. Additional impacts could occur because the proposed bridge piers would also be placed in the river flow, obstructing whitewater rafting. The larger concrete bridge elements of Alternatives C, T, S, and S-2 would moderately decrease the visual quality of the landscape within the project area. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968 (16 U.S.C. 1271 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100446, 277 pages and maps, November 12, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Drilling KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Recreation KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wild and Scenic Rivers KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Merced River KW - Yosemite National Park KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133348?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=FERGUSON+SLIDE+PERMANENT+RESTORATION+PROJECT%2C+MARIPOSA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=FERGUSON+SLIDE+PERMANENT+RESTORATION+PROJECT%2C+MARIPOSA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - California Department of Transportation, Fresno, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 12, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - FERGUSON SLIDE PERMANENT RESTORATION PROJECT, MARIPOSA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 16379473; 14716 AB - PURPOSE: The restoration of full highway access between Mariposa and El Portal via State Route 140 (SR 140) in Mariposa County, California is proposed. The project would involve repairing or permanently bypassing the 0.7 mile segment of SR 140 that was blocked or damaged by the Ferguson rockslide. Within the limits of the proposed project and prior to the Ferguson rockslide, SR 140 was a two-lane, undivided highway. Since April 2006, rockslides have covered the highway with 798,000 tons of rock and debris closing SR 140 to traffic from eight miles east of Briceburg to 7.6 miles west of El Portal. Following the rockslide and the completion of a temporary detour, SR 140 now bridges the Merced RIver, bypassing the rockslide, as a one-lane road. This bypass route provides for one-directional traffic that is controlled by signalized lights. Six build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. Alternative C would involve construction of an open-cut realignment. The highway would be realigned to the northeast of its current alignment, spanning the Merced River and bypassing the rockslide. SR 140 would cut through the mountain across the Merced River from the rockslide and then span back across the river where it would meet the existing alignment. Two bridges would be built across the river. Alternative T would utilize a tunnel realignment to bypass the rockslide. SR 140 would tunnel 700 feet through the mountain across the Merced River from the rockslide and then span back across the river where it would meet the existing alignment. Two bridges would be built across the river. Under Alternative T-3, a 2,200-foot-long tunnel would be constructed under the area of the slide. Alternative S would realign the highway to the northeast of its current alignment, spanning the Merced River with two bridges and bypassing the rockslide with a hillside viaduct and retaining wall. Alternative S-2 is similar to Alternative S and would realign the highway to the northeast of its current alignment, spanning the Merced River with two bridges and bypassing the rockslide with a hillside viaduct and retaining wall. This alternative differs from Alternative S in that it proposes two bridge type variations along with their own specific roadway alignments. The first (S2-V1) would construct two tied-arch bridges, which use an arch structure with cables above the bridge deck for support. The second (S2-V2) would construct two slant-leg bridges, which use V-shaped columns to support the bridge deck. Alternative R would involve construction of a rockshed (cut-and-cover tunnel) through the talus (foundation layer) of the slide along the existing SR 140 alignment. The removal of rock material would range from 8,300 cubic yards for Alternative S to 320,000 cubic yards for Alternative C. Estimated project costs range from $34.6 for Alternative S to $179.2 million for Alternative T-3. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Permanent restoration of SR 140 would eliminate the detour and provide full access to all types of travelers, ranging from recreational to business, between the town of Mariposa and Yosemite National Park. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities may temporarily and indirectly affect hardhead fish as the soil is stirred up and creates cloudiness within the river. All the build alternatives would remove potential bat foraging and roosting habitat. Alternatives R and T-3 would remove 2.10 acres and 0.45 acre of limestone salamander habitat, respectively, resulting in the likely take of the animal itself. Alternatives R and T-3 would cut into the slopes on the south side of the river impacting habitat for the special-status plant species Tompkins sedge, Mariposa clarkia, Merced clarkia, and smallflower monkeyflower. Alternatives C, T, and S would impede the free-flowing nature of the Wild and Scenic-designated Merced River by constructing bridge piers within the wild and scenic river boundaries. Additional impacts could occur because the proposed bridge piers would also be placed in the river flow, obstructing whitewater rafting. The larger concrete bridge elements of Alternatives C, T, S, and S-2 would moderately decrease the visual quality of the landscape within the project area. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968 (16 U.S.C. 1271 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100446, 277 pages and maps, November 12, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Drilling KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Recreation KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wild and Scenic Rivers KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Merced River KW - Yosemite National Park KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/16379473?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=FERGUSON+SLIDE+PERMANENT+RESTORATION+PROJECT%2C+MARIPOSA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=FERGUSON+SLIDE+PERMANENT+RESTORATION+PROJECT%2C+MARIPOSA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - California Department of Transportation, Fresno, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 12, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). [Part 6 of 24] T2 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). AN - 873133692; 14712-2_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 18-mile eastern extension of light rail transit (LRT) is proposed to enhance transportation in the Central Puget Sound metropolitan region of King County, Washington. The East Link LRT Project would connect to the rail's system's initial segment in downtown Seattle and extend east to Mercer Island, Bellevue, and Redmond. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes new alternatives and design modifications and supplements the 2008 draft EIS for the project. The project corridor has been divided into five segments along distinct geographic boundaries. Alternatives considered include 24 build alternatives (one in Segment A, six in Segment B, ten in Segment C, four in Segment D, and three in Segment E), the No Build Alternative, and four maintenance facility alternatives (three in Segment D and one in Segment E). Each alternative route includes one to four stations; a total of 29 station options exist in the five segments. Segment A begins in the downtown Seattle transit Tunnel at the International District/Chinatown Station and extends eastward on Interstate 90 (I-90) across north Beacon Hill and Rainier Valley, then travels on the I-90 floating bridge across Lake Washington to Mercer Island. The 6.9-mile route remains on I-90 across Mercer Island and Lake Washington to south Bellevue. Segment B travels from the I-90 center roadway northward to approximately SE 6th Street. A new alternative in Segment B, the preferred 112th SE Modified Alternative (B2M), leaves the I-90 center roadway at Bellevue Way SE and continues north adjacent to Bellevue Way SE and then along 112th Avenue SE. Segment C extends between SE 6th and NE 12th Streets and transitions from the primarily suburban single-family residential and commercial area of south Bellevue to the dense, urban central business district of downtown Bellevue. Key destinations in Segment C are Bellevue's downtown core and transit center and, on the east side of I-405, the Overlake Hospital and Group Health medical centers. Segment D is located within the Bel-Red subarea of Bellevue and the Overlake neighborhood of Redmond. A potential tail track could extend past the Overlake Transit Center or within the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway corridor near the Segment C/D connection. The preferred Alternative D2A has been modified from the 2008 draft EIS by shifting the route in the 120th Station area to the north, remaining adjacent to State Route (SR) 520 north of NE 24th Street and moving the Overlake Village Station along SR 520. Segment E travels parallel to SR 520 north and east into Downtown Redmond. The preferred Alternative E2 for this segment has been modified by replacing the Town Center Station and the Transit Center Station with one Downtown Station located midway between the two original stations, adding an 800-foot-long tail track for train layover and turnback operations, and discontinuing the alignment up 161st Avenue NE. The project may be constructed in phases beginning by 2013 to 2014, with the segment to Bellevue planned for opening by 2020 and to Overlake Transit Center planned for 2021. Segment E to Downtown Redmond is planned to be constructed after 2021. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The East Link LRT system would improve the speed and reliability of the regional transportation network and expand network capacity. Diversion of commuters and other travelers from automobiles to cleaner, more efficient rail transport would reduce congestion on regional highways and roads and reduce future air pollutant emissions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Project development would require the displacement of residences and businesses, land in recreational use, including parkland, and open space, as well as historically significant structures and archaeological sites. The transit facilities would alter visual aesthetics along the chosen corridors and utilities would have to be relocated in some areas. Construction workers would encounter hazardous waste sites. With respect to the natural environment, the project would impact wetlands and other wildlife habitats. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0079D, Volume 33, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100442, Executive Summary--36 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--347 pages, November 5, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Open Space KW - Parks KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 404(b) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Washington KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133692?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-05&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.title=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 5, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). [Part 5 of 24] T2 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). AN - 873133689; 14712-2_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 18-mile eastern extension of light rail transit (LRT) is proposed to enhance transportation in the Central Puget Sound metropolitan region of King County, Washington. The East Link LRT Project would connect to the rail's system's initial segment in downtown Seattle and extend east to Mercer Island, Bellevue, and Redmond. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes new alternatives and design modifications and supplements the 2008 draft EIS for the project. The project corridor has been divided into five segments along distinct geographic boundaries. Alternatives considered include 24 build alternatives (one in Segment A, six in Segment B, ten in Segment C, four in Segment D, and three in Segment E), the No Build Alternative, and four maintenance facility alternatives (three in Segment D and one in Segment E). Each alternative route includes one to four stations; a total of 29 station options exist in the five segments. Segment A begins in the downtown Seattle transit Tunnel at the International District/Chinatown Station and extends eastward on Interstate 90 (I-90) across north Beacon Hill and Rainier Valley, then travels on the I-90 floating bridge across Lake Washington to Mercer Island. The 6.9-mile route remains on I-90 across Mercer Island and Lake Washington to south Bellevue. Segment B travels from the I-90 center roadway northward to approximately SE 6th Street. A new alternative in Segment B, the preferred 112th SE Modified Alternative (B2M), leaves the I-90 center roadway at Bellevue Way SE and continues north adjacent to Bellevue Way SE and then along 112th Avenue SE. Segment C extends between SE 6th and NE 12th Streets and transitions from the primarily suburban single-family residential and commercial area of south Bellevue to the dense, urban central business district of downtown Bellevue. Key destinations in Segment C are Bellevue's downtown core and transit center and, on the east side of I-405, the Overlake Hospital and Group Health medical centers. Segment D is located within the Bel-Red subarea of Bellevue and the Overlake neighborhood of Redmond. A potential tail track could extend past the Overlake Transit Center or within the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway corridor near the Segment C/D connection. The preferred Alternative D2A has been modified from the 2008 draft EIS by shifting the route in the 120th Station area to the north, remaining adjacent to State Route (SR) 520 north of NE 24th Street and moving the Overlake Village Station along SR 520. Segment E travels parallel to SR 520 north and east into Downtown Redmond. The preferred Alternative E2 for this segment has been modified by replacing the Town Center Station and the Transit Center Station with one Downtown Station located midway between the two original stations, adding an 800-foot-long tail track for train layover and turnback operations, and discontinuing the alignment up 161st Avenue NE. The project may be constructed in phases beginning by 2013 to 2014, with the segment to Bellevue planned for opening by 2020 and to Overlake Transit Center planned for 2021. Segment E to Downtown Redmond is planned to be constructed after 2021. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The East Link LRT system would improve the speed and reliability of the regional transportation network and expand network capacity. Diversion of commuters and other travelers from automobiles to cleaner, more efficient rail transport would reduce congestion on regional highways and roads and reduce future air pollutant emissions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Project development would require the displacement of residences and businesses, land in recreational use, including parkland, and open space, as well as historically significant structures and archaeological sites. The transit facilities would alter visual aesthetics along the chosen corridors and utilities would have to be relocated in some areas. Construction workers would encounter hazardous waste sites. With respect to the natural environment, the project would impact wetlands and other wildlife habitats. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0079D, Volume 33, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100442, Executive Summary--36 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--347 pages, November 5, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Open Space KW - Parks KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 404(b) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Washington KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133689?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-05&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.title=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 5, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). [Part 4 of 24] T2 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). AN - 873133687; 14712-2_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 18-mile eastern extension of light rail transit (LRT) is proposed to enhance transportation in the Central Puget Sound metropolitan region of King County, Washington. The East Link LRT Project would connect to the rail's system's initial segment in downtown Seattle and extend east to Mercer Island, Bellevue, and Redmond. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes new alternatives and design modifications and supplements the 2008 draft EIS for the project. The project corridor has been divided into five segments along distinct geographic boundaries. Alternatives considered include 24 build alternatives (one in Segment A, six in Segment B, ten in Segment C, four in Segment D, and three in Segment E), the No Build Alternative, and four maintenance facility alternatives (three in Segment D and one in Segment E). Each alternative route includes one to four stations; a total of 29 station options exist in the five segments. Segment A begins in the downtown Seattle transit Tunnel at the International District/Chinatown Station and extends eastward on Interstate 90 (I-90) across north Beacon Hill and Rainier Valley, then travels on the I-90 floating bridge across Lake Washington to Mercer Island. The 6.9-mile route remains on I-90 across Mercer Island and Lake Washington to south Bellevue. Segment B travels from the I-90 center roadway northward to approximately SE 6th Street. A new alternative in Segment B, the preferred 112th SE Modified Alternative (B2M), leaves the I-90 center roadway at Bellevue Way SE and continues north adjacent to Bellevue Way SE and then along 112th Avenue SE. Segment C extends between SE 6th and NE 12th Streets and transitions from the primarily suburban single-family residential and commercial area of south Bellevue to the dense, urban central business district of downtown Bellevue. Key destinations in Segment C are Bellevue's downtown core and transit center and, on the east side of I-405, the Overlake Hospital and Group Health medical centers. Segment D is located within the Bel-Red subarea of Bellevue and the Overlake neighborhood of Redmond. A potential tail track could extend past the Overlake Transit Center or within the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway corridor near the Segment C/D connection. The preferred Alternative D2A has been modified from the 2008 draft EIS by shifting the route in the 120th Station area to the north, remaining adjacent to State Route (SR) 520 north of NE 24th Street and moving the Overlake Village Station along SR 520. Segment E travels parallel to SR 520 north and east into Downtown Redmond. The preferred Alternative E2 for this segment has been modified by replacing the Town Center Station and the Transit Center Station with one Downtown Station located midway between the two original stations, adding an 800-foot-long tail track for train layover and turnback operations, and discontinuing the alignment up 161st Avenue NE. The project may be constructed in phases beginning by 2013 to 2014, with the segment to Bellevue planned for opening by 2020 and to Overlake Transit Center planned for 2021. Segment E to Downtown Redmond is planned to be constructed after 2021. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The East Link LRT system would improve the speed and reliability of the regional transportation network and expand network capacity. Diversion of commuters and other travelers from automobiles to cleaner, more efficient rail transport would reduce congestion on regional highways and roads and reduce future air pollutant emissions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Project development would require the displacement of residences and businesses, land in recreational use, including parkland, and open space, as well as historically significant structures and archaeological sites. The transit facilities would alter visual aesthetics along the chosen corridors and utilities would have to be relocated in some areas. Construction workers would encounter hazardous waste sites. With respect to the natural environment, the project would impact wetlands and other wildlife habitats. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0079D, Volume 33, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100442, Executive Summary--36 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--347 pages, November 5, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Open Space KW - Parks KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 404(b) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Washington KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133687?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-05&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.title=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 5, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). [Part 23 of 24] T2 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). AN - 873133440; 14712-2_0023 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 18-mile eastern extension of light rail transit (LRT) is proposed to enhance transportation in the Central Puget Sound metropolitan region of King County, Washington. The East Link LRT Project would connect to the rail's system's initial segment in downtown Seattle and extend east to Mercer Island, Bellevue, and Redmond. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes new alternatives and design modifications and supplements the 2008 draft EIS for the project. The project corridor has been divided into five segments along distinct geographic boundaries. Alternatives considered include 24 build alternatives (one in Segment A, six in Segment B, ten in Segment C, four in Segment D, and three in Segment E), the No Build Alternative, and four maintenance facility alternatives (three in Segment D and one in Segment E). Each alternative route includes one to four stations; a total of 29 station options exist in the five segments. Segment A begins in the downtown Seattle transit Tunnel at the International District/Chinatown Station and extends eastward on Interstate 90 (I-90) across north Beacon Hill and Rainier Valley, then travels on the I-90 floating bridge across Lake Washington to Mercer Island. The 6.9-mile route remains on I-90 across Mercer Island and Lake Washington to south Bellevue. Segment B travels from the I-90 center roadway northward to approximately SE 6th Street. A new alternative in Segment B, the preferred 112th SE Modified Alternative (B2M), leaves the I-90 center roadway at Bellevue Way SE and continues north adjacent to Bellevue Way SE and then along 112th Avenue SE. Segment C extends between SE 6th and NE 12th Streets and transitions from the primarily suburban single-family residential and commercial area of south Bellevue to the dense, urban central business district of downtown Bellevue. Key destinations in Segment C are Bellevue's downtown core and transit center and, on the east side of I-405, the Overlake Hospital and Group Health medical centers. Segment D is located within the Bel-Red subarea of Bellevue and the Overlake neighborhood of Redmond. A potential tail track could extend past the Overlake Transit Center or within the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway corridor near the Segment C/D connection. The preferred Alternative D2A has been modified from the 2008 draft EIS by shifting the route in the 120th Station area to the north, remaining adjacent to State Route (SR) 520 north of NE 24th Street and moving the Overlake Village Station along SR 520. Segment E travels parallel to SR 520 north and east into Downtown Redmond. The preferred Alternative E2 for this segment has been modified by replacing the Town Center Station and the Transit Center Station with one Downtown Station located midway between the two original stations, adding an 800-foot-long tail track for train layover and turnback operations, and discontinuing the alignment up 161st Avenue NE. The project may be constructed in phases beginning by 2013 to 2014, with the segment to Bellevue planned for opening by 2020 and to Overlake Transit Center planned for 2021. Segment E to Downtown Redmond is planned to be constructed after 2021. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The East Link LRT system would improve the speed and reliability of the regional transportation network and expand network capacity. Diversion of commuters and other travelers from automobiles to cleaner, more efficient rail transport would reduce congestion on regional highways and roads and reduce future air pollutant emissions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Project development would require the displacement of residences and businesses, land in recreational use, including parkland, and open space, as well as historically significant structures and archaeological sites. The transit facilities would alter visual aesthetics along the chosen corridors and utilities would have to be relocated in some areas. Construction workers would encounter hazardous waste sites. With respect to the natural environment, the project would impact wetlands and other wildlife habitats. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0079D, Volume 33, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100442, Executive Summary--36 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--347 pages, November 5, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 23 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Open Space KW - Parks KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 404(b) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Washington KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133440?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-05&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.title=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 5, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). [Part 22 of 24] T2 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). AN - 873133437; 14712-2_0022 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 18-mile eastern extension of light rail transit (LRT) is proposed to enhance transportation in the Central Puget Sound metropolitan region of King County, Washington. The East Link LRT Project would connect to the rail's system's initial segment in downtown Seattle and extend east to Mercer Island, Bellevue, and Redmond. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes new alternatives and design modifications and supplements the 2008 draft EIS for the project. The project corridor has been divided into five segments along distinct geographic boundaries. Alternatives considered include 24 build alternatives (one in Segment A, six in Segment B, ten in Segment C, four in Segment D, and three in Segment E), the No Build Alternative, and four maintenance facility alternatives (three in Segment D and one in Segment E). Each alternative route includes one to four stations; a total of 29 station options exist in the five segments. Segment A begins in the downtown Seattle transit Tunnel at the International District/Chinatown Station and extends eastward on Interstate 90 (I-90) across north Beacon Hill and Rainier Valley, then travels on the I-90 floating bridge across Lake Washington to Mercer Island. The 6.9-mile route remains on I-90 across Mercer Island and Lake Washington to south Bellevue. Segment B travels from the I-90 center roadway northward to approximately SE 6th Street. A new alternative in Segment B, the preferred 112th SE Modified Alternative (B2M), leaves the I-90 center roadway at Bellevue Way SE and continues north adjacent to Bellevue Way SE and then along 112th Avenue SE. Segment C extends between SE 6th and NE 12th Streets and transitions from the primarily suburban single-family residential and commercial area of south Bellevue to the dense, urban central business district of downtown Bellevue. Key destinations in Segment C are Bellevue's downtown core and transit center and, on the east side of I-405, the Overlake Hospital and Group Health medical centers. Segment D is located within the Bel-Red subarea of Bellevue and the Overlake neighborhood of Redmond. A potential tail track could extend past the Overlake Transit Center or within the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway corridor near the Segment C/D connection. The preferred Alternative D2A has been modified from the 2008 draft EIS by shifting the route in the 120th Station area to the north, remaining adjacent to State Route (SR) 520 north of NE 24th Street and moving the Overlake Village Station along SR 520. Segment E travels parallel to SR 520 north and east into Downtown Redmond. The preferred Alternative E2 for this segment has been modified by replacing the Town Center Station and the Transit Center Station with one Downtown Station located midway between the two original stations, adding an 800-foot-long tail track for train layover and turnback operations, and discontinuing the alignment up 161st Avenue NE. The project may be constructed in phases beginning by 2013 to 2014, with the segment to Bellevue planned for opening by 2020 and to Overlake Transit Center planned for 2021. Segment E to Downtown Redmond is planned to be constructed after 2021. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The East Link LRT system would improve the speed and reliability of the regional transportation network and expand network capacity. Diversion of commuters and other travelers from automobiles to cleaner, more efficient rail transport would reduce congestion on regional highways and roads and reduce future air pollutant emissions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Project development would require the displacement of residences and businesses, land in recreational use, including parkland, and open space, as well as historically significant structures and archaeological sites. The transit facilities would alter visual aesthetics along the chosen corridors and utilities would have to be relocated in some areas. Construction workers would encounter hazardous waste sites. With respect to the natural environment, the project would impact wetlands and other wildlife habitats. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0079D, Volume 33, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100442, Executive Summary--36 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--347 pages, November 5, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 22 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Open Space KW - Parks KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 404(b) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Washington KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133437?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-05&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.title=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 5, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). [Part 20 of 24] T2 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). AN - 873133393; 14712-2_0020 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 18-mile eastern extension of light rail transit (LRT) is proposed to enhance transportation in the Central Puget Sound metropolitan region of King County, Washington. The East Link LRT Project would connect to the rail's system's initial segment in downtown Seattle and extend east to Mercer Island, Bellevue, and Redmond. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes new alternatives and design modifications and supplements the 2008 draft EIS for the project. The project corridor has been divided into five segments along distinct geographic boundaries. Alternatives considered include 24 build alternatives (one in Segment A, six in Segment B, ten in Segment C, four in Segment D, and three in Segment E), the No Build Alternative, and four maintenance facility alternatives (three in Segment D and one in Segment E). Each alternative route includes one to four stations; a total of 29 station options exist in the five segments. Segment A begins in the downtown Seattle transit Tunnel at the International District/Chinatown Station and extends eastward on Interstate 90 (I-90) across north Beacon Hill and Rainier Valley, then travels on the I-90 floating bridge across Lake Washington to Mercer Island. The 6.9-mile route remains on I-90 across Mercer Island and Lake Washington to south Bellevue. Segment B travels from the I-90 center roadway northward to approximately SE 6th Street. A new alternative in Segment B, the preferred 112th SE Modified Alternative (B2M), leaves the I-90 center roadway at Bellevue Way SE and continues north adjacent to Bellevue Way SE and then along 112th Avenue SE. Segment C extends between SE 6th and NE 12th Streets and transitions from the primarily suburban single-family residential and commercial area of south Bellevue to the dense, urban central business district of downtown Bellevue. Key destinations in Segment C are Bellevue's downtown core and transit center and, on the east side of I-405, the Overlake Hospital and Group Health medical centers. Segment D is located within the Bel-Red subarea of Bellevue and the Overlake neighborhood of Redmond. A potential tail track could extend past the Overlake Transit Center or within the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway corridor near the Segment C/D connection. The preferred Alternative D2A has been modified from the 2008 draft EIS by shifting the route in the 120th Station area to the north, remaining adjacent to State Route (SR) 520 north of NE 24th Street and moving the Overlake Village Station along SR 520. Segment E travels parallel to SR 520 north and east into Downtown Redmond. The preferred Alternative E2 for this segment has been modified by replacing the Town Center Station and the Transit Center Station with one Downtown Station located midway between the two original stations, adding an 800-foot-long tail track for train layover and turnback operations, and discontinuing the alignment up 161st Avenue NE. The project may be constructed in phases beginning by 2013 to 2014, with the segment to Bellevue planned for opening by 2020 and to Overlake Transit Center planned for 2021. Segment E to Downtown Redmond is planned to be constructed after 2021. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The East Link LRT system would improve the speed and reliability of the regional transportation network and expand network capacity. Diversion of commuters and other travelers from automobiles to cleaner, more efficient rail transport would reduce congestion on regional highways and roads and reduce future air pollutant emissions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Project development would require the displacement of residences and businesses, land in recreational use, including parkland, and open space, as well as historically significant structures and archaeological sites. The transit facilities would alter visual aesthetics along the chosen corridors and utilities would have to be relocated in some areas. Construction workers would encounter hazardous waste sites. With respect to the natural environment, the project would impact wetlands and other wildlife habitats. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0079D, Volume 33, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100442, Executive Summary--36 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--347 pages, November 5, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 20 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Open Space KW - Parks KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 404(b) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Washington KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133393?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-05&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.title=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 5, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). [Part 19 of 24] T2 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). AN - 873133390; 14712-2_0019 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 18-mile eastern extension of light rail transit (LRT) is proposed to enhance transportation in the Central Puget Sound metropolitan region of King County, Washington. The East Link LRT Project would connect to the rail's system's initial segment in downtown Seattle and extend east to Mercer Island, Bellevue, and Redmond. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes new alternatives and design modifications and supplements the 2008 draft EIS for the project. The project corridor has been divided into five segments along distinct geographic boundaries. Alternatives considered include 24 build alternatives (one in Segment A, six in Segment B, ten in Segment C, four in Segment D, and three in Segment E), the No Build Alternative, and four maintenance facility alternatives (three in Segment D and one in Segment E). Each alternative route includes one to four stations; a total of 29 station options exist in the five segments. Segment A begins in the downtown Seattle transit Tunnel at the International District/Chinatown Station and extends eastward on Interstate 90 (I-90) across north Beacon Hill and Rainier Valley, then travels on the I-90 floating bridge across Lake Washington to Mercer Island. The 6.9-mile route remains on I-90 across Mercer Island and Lake Washington to south Bellevue. Segment B travels from the I-90 center roadway northward to approximately SE 6th Street. A new alternative in Segment B, the preferred 112th SE Modified Alternative (B2M), leaves the I-90 center roadway at Bellevue Way SE and continues north adjacent to Bellevue Way SE and then along 112th Avenue SE. Segment C extends between SE 6th and NE 12th Streets and transitions from the primarily suburban single-family residential and commercial area of south Bellevue to the dense, urban central business district of downtown Bellevue. Key destinations in Segment C are Bellevue's downtown core and transit center and, on the east side of I-405, the Overlake Hospital and Group Health medical centers. Segment D is located within the Bel-Red subarea of Bellevue and the Overlake neighborhood of Redmond. A potential tail track could extend past the Overlake Transit Center or within the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway corridor near the Segment C/D connection. The preferred Alternative D2A has been modified from the 2008 draft EIS by shifting the route in the 120th Station area to the north, remaining adjacent to State Route (SR) 520 north of NE 24th Street and moving the Overlake Village Station along SR 520. Segment E travels parallel to SR 520 north and east into Downtown Redmond. The preferred Alternative E2 for this segment has been modified by replacing the Town Center Station and the Transit Center Station with one Downtown Station located midway between the two original stations, adding an 800-foot-long tail track for train layover and turnback operations, and discontinuing the alignment up 161st Avenue NE. The project may be constructed in phases beginning by 2013 to 2014, with the segment to Bellevue planned for opening by 2020 and to Overlake Transit Center planned for 2021. Segment E to Downtown Redmond is planned to be constructed after 2021. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The East Link LRT system would improve the speed and reliability of the regional transportation network and expand network capacity. Diversion of commuters and other travelers from automobiles to cleaner, more efficient rail transport would reduce congestion on regional highways and roads and reduce future air pollutant emissions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Project development would require the displacement of residences and businesses, land in recreational use, including parkland, and open space, as well as historically significant structures and archaeological sites. The transit facilities would alter visual aesthetics along the chosen corridors and utilities would have to be relocated in some areas. Construction workers would encounter hazardous waste sites. With respect to the natural environment, the project would impact wetlands and other wildlife habitats. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0079D, Volume 33, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100442, Executive Summary--36 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--347 pages, November 5, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 19 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Open Space KW - Parks KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 404(b) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Washington KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133390?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-05&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.title=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 5, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). [Part 13 of 24] T2 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). AN - 873133385; 14712-2_0013 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 18-mile eastern extension of light rail transit (LRT) is proposed to enhance transportation in the Central Puget Sound metropolitan region of King County, Washington. The East Link LRT Project would connect to the rail's system's initial segment in downtown Seattle and extend east to Mercer Island, Bellevue, and Redmond. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes new alternatives and design modifications and supplements the 2008 draft EIS for the project. The project corridor has been divided into five segments along distinct geographic boundaries. Alternatives considered include 24 build alternatives (one in Segment A, six in Segment B, ten in Segment C, four in Segment D, and three in Segment E), the No Build Alternative, and four maintenance facility alternatives (three in Segment D and one in Segment E). Each alternative route includes one to four stations; a total of 29 station options exist in the five segments. Segment A begins in the downtown Seattle transit Tunnel at the International District/Chinatown Station and extends eastward on Interstate 90 (I-90) across north Beacon Hill and Rainier Valley, then travels on the I-90 floating bridge across Lake Washington to Mercer Island. The 6.9-mile route remains on I-90 across Mercer Island and Lake Washington to south Bellevue. Segment B travels from the I-90 center roadway northward to approximately SE 6th Street. A new alternative in Segment B, the preferred 112th SE Modified Alternative (B2M), leaves the I-90 center roadway at Bellevue Way SE and continues north adjacent to Bellevue Way SE and then along 112th Avenue SE. Segment C extends between SE 6th and NE 12th Streets and transitions from the primarily suburban single-family residential and commercial area of south Bellevue to the dense, urban central business district of downtown Bellevue. Key destinations in Segment C are Bellevue's downtown core and transit center and, on the east side of I-405, the Overlake Hospital and Group Health medical centers. Segment D is located within the Bel-Red subarea of Bellevue and the Overlake neighborhood of Redmond. A potential tail track could extend past the Overlake Transit Center or within the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway corridor near the Segment C/D connection. The preferred Alternative D2A has been modified from the 2008 draft EIS by shifting the route in the 120th Station area to the north, remaining adjacent to State Route (SR) 520 north of NE 24th Street and moving the Overlake Village Station along SR 520. Segment E travels parallel to SR 520 north and east into Downtown Redmond. The preferred Alternative E2 for this segment has been modified by replacing the Town Center Station and the Transit Center Station with one Downtown Station located midway between the two original stations, adding an 800-foot-long tail track for train layover and turnback operations, and discontinuing the alignment up 161st Avenue NE. The project may be constructed in phases beginning by 2013 to 2014, with the segment to Bellevue planned for opening by 2020 and to Overlake Transit Center planned for 2021. Segment E to Downtown Redmond is planned to be constructed after 2021. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The East Link LRT system would improve the speed and reliability of the regional transportation network and expand network capacity. Diversion of commuters and other travelers from automobiles to cleaner, more efficient rail transport would reduce congestion on regional highways and roads and reduce future air pollutant emissions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Project development would require the displacement of residences and businesses, land in recreational use, including parkland, and open space, as well as historically significant structures and archaeological sites. The transit facilities would alter visual aesthetics along the chosen corridors and utilities would have to be relocated in some areas. Construction workers would encounter hazardous waste sites. With respect to the natural environment, the project would impact wetlands and other wildlife habitats. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0079D, Volume 33, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100442, Executive Summary--36 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--347 pages, November 5, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 13 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Open Space KW - Parks KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 404(b) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Washington KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133385?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-05&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.title=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 5, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). [Part 3 of 24] T2 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). AN - 873133381; 14712-2_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 18-mile eastern extension of light rail transit (LRT) is proposed to enhance transportation in the Central Puget Sound metropolitan region of King County, Washington. The East Link LRT Project would connect to the rail's system's initial segment in downtown Seattle and extend east to Mercer Island, Bellevue, and Redmond. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes new alternatives and design modifications and supplements the 2008 draft EIS for the project. The project corridor has been divided into five segments along distinct geographic boundaries. Alternatives considered include 24 build alternatives (one in Segment A, six in Segment B, ten in Segment C, four in Segment D, and three in Segment E), the No Build Alternative, and four maintenance facility alternatives (three in Segment D and one in Segment E). Each alternative route includes one to four stations; a total of 29 station options exist in the five segments. Segment A begins in the downtown Seattle transit Tunnel at the International District/Chinatown Station and extends eastward on Interstate 90 (I-90) across north Beacon Hill and Rainier Valley, then travels on the I-90 floating bridge across Lake Washington to Mercer Island. The 6.9-mile route remains on I-90 across Mercer Island and Lake Washington to south Bellevue. Segment B travels from the I-90 center roadway northward to approximately SE 6th Street. A new alternative in Segment B, the preferred 112th SE Modified Alternative (B2M), leaves the I-90 center roadway at Bellevue Way SE and continues north adjacent to Bellevue Way SE and then along 112th Avenue SE. Segment C extends between SE 6th and NE 12th Streets and transitions from the primarily suburban single-family residential and commercial area of south Bellevue to the dense, urban central business district of downtown Bellevue. Key destinations in Segment C are Bellevue's downtown core and transit center and, on the east side of I-405, the Overlake Hospital and Group Health medical centers. Segment D is located within the Bel-Red subarea of Bellevue and the Overlake neighborhood of Redmond. A potential tail track could extend past the Overlake Transit Center or within the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway corridor near the Segment C/D connection. The preferred Alternative D2A has been modified from the 2008 draft EIS by shifting the route in the 120th Station area to the north, remaining adjacent to State Route (SR) 520 north of NE 24th Street and moving the Overlake Village Station along SR 520. Segment E travels parallel to SR 520 north and east into Downtown Redmond. The preferred Alternative E2 for this segment has been modified by replacing the Town Center Station and the Transit Center Station with one Downtown Station located midway between the two original stations, adding an 800-foot-long tail track for train layover and turnback operations, and discontinuing the alignment up 161st Avenue NE. The project may be constructed in phases beginning by 2013 to 2014, with the segment to Bellevue planned for opening by 2020 and to Overlake Transit Center planned for 2021. Segment E to Downtown Redmond is planned to be constructed after 2021. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The East Link LRT system would improve the speed and reliability of the regional transportation network and expand network capacity. Diversion of commuters and other travelers from automobiles to cleaner, more efficient rail transport would reduce congestion on regional highways and roads and reduce future air pollutant emissions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Project development would require the displacement of residences and businesses, land in recreational use, including parkland, and open space, as well as historically significant structures and archaeological sites. The transit facilities would alter visual aesthetics along the chosen corridors and utilities would have to be relocated in some areas. Construction workers would encounter hazardous waste sites. With respect to the natural environment, the project would impact wetlands and other wildlife habitats. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0079D, Volume 33, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100442, Executive Summary--36 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--347 pages, November 5, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Open Space KW - Parks KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 404(b) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Washington KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133381?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-05&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.title=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 5, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). [Part 2 of 24] T2 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). AN - 873133371; 14712-2_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 18-mile eastern extension of light rail transit (LRT) is proposed to enhance transportation in the Central Puget Sound metropolitan region of King County, Washington. The East Link LRT Project would connect to the rail's system's initial segment in downtown Seattle and extend east to Mercer Island, Bellevue, and Redmond. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes new alternatives and design modifications and supplements the 2008 draft EIS for the project. The project corridor has been divided into five segments along distinct geographic boundaries. Alternatives considered include 24 build alternatives (one in Segment A, six in Segment B, ten in Segment C, four in Segment D, and three in Segment E), the No Build Alternative, and four maintenance facility alternatives (three in Segment D and one in Segment E). Each alternative route includes one to four stations; a total of 29 station options exist in the five segments. Segment A begins in the downtown Seattle transit Tunnel at the International District/Chinatown Station and extends eastward on Interstate 90 (I-90) across north Beacon Hill and Rainier Valley, then travels on the I-90 floating bridge across Lake Washington to Mercer Island. The 6.9-mile route remains on I-90 across Mercer Island and Lake Washington to south Bellevue. Segment B travels from the I-90 center roadway northward to approximately SE 6th Street. A new alternative in Segment B, the preferred 112th SE Modified Alternative (B2M), leaves the I-90 center roadway at Bellevue Way SE and continues north adjacent to Bellevue Way SE and then along 112th Avenue SE. Segment C extends between SE 6th and NE 12th Streets and transitions from the primarily suburban single-family residential and commercial area of south Bellevue to the dense, urban central business district of downtown Bellevue. Key destinations in Segment C are Bellevue's downtown core and transit center and, on the east side of I-405, the Overlake Hospital and Group Health medical centers. Segment D is located within the Bel-Red subarea of Bellevue and the Overlake neighborhood of Redmond. A potential tail track could extend past the Overlake Transit Center or within the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway corridor near the Segment C/D connection. The preferred Alternative D2A has been modified from the 2008 draft EIS by shifting the route in the 120th Station area to the north, remaining adjacent to State Route (SR) 520 north of NE 24th Street and moving the Overlake Village Station along SR 520. Segment E travels parallel to SR 520 north and east into Downtown Redmond. The preferred Alternative E2 for this segment has been modified by replacing the Town Center Station and the Transit Center Station with one Downtown Station located midway between the two original stations, adding an 800-foot-long tail track for train layover and turnback operations, and discontinuing the alignment up 161st Avenue NE. The project may be constructed in phases beginning by 2013 to 2014, with the segment to Bellevue planned for opening by 2020 and to Overlake Transit Center planned for 2021. Segment E to Downtown Redmond is planned to be constructed after 2021. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The East Link LRT system would improve the speed and reliability of the regional transportation network and expand network capacity. Diversion of commuters and other travelers from automobiles to cleaner, more efficient rail transport would reduce congestion on regional highways and roads and reduce future air pollutant emissions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Project development would require the displacement of residences and businesses, land in recreational use, including parkland, and open space, as well as historically significant structures and archaeological sites. The transit facilities would alter visual aesthetics along the chosen corridors and utilities would have to be relocated in some areas. Construction workers would encounter hazardous waste sites. With respect to the natural environment, the project would impact wetlands and other wildlife habitats. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0079D, Volume 33, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100442, Executive Summary--36 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--347 pages, November 5, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Open Space KW - Parks KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 404(b) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Washington KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133371?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-05&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.title=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 5, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). [Part 1 of 24] T2 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). AN - 873133364; 14712-2_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 18-mile eastern extension of light rail transit (LRT) is proposed to enhance transportation in the Central Puget Sound metropolitan region of King County, Washington. The East Link LRT Project would connect to the rail's system's initial segment in downtown Seattle and extend east to Mercer Island, Bellevue, and Redmond. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes new alternatives and design modifications and supplements the 2008 draft EIS for the project. The project corridor has been divided into five segments along distinct geographic boundaries. Alternatives considered include 24 build alternatives (one in Segment A, six in Segment B, ten in Segment C, four in Segment D, and three in Segment E), the No Build Alternative, and four maintenance facility alternatives (three in Segment D and one in Segment E). Each alternative route includes one to four stations; a total of 29 station options exist in the five segments. Segment A begins in the downtown Seattle transit Tunnel at the International District/Chinatown Station and extends eastward on Interstate 90 (I-90) across north Beacon Hill and Rainier Valley, then travels on the I-90 floating bridge across Lake Washington to Mercer Island. The 6.9-mile route remains on I-90 across Mercer Island and Lake Washington to south Bellevue. Segment B travels from the I-90 center roadway northward to approximately SE 6th Street. A new alternative in Segment B, the preferred 112th SE Modified Alternative (B2M), leaves the I-90 center roadway at Bellevue Way SE and continues north adjacent to Bellevue Way SE and then along 112th Avenue SE. Segment C extends between SE 6th and NE 12th Streets and transitions from the primarily suburban single-family residential and commercial area of south Bellevue to the dense, urban central business district of downtown Bellevue. Key destinations in Segment C are Bellevue's downtown core and transit center and, on the east side of I-405, the Overlake Hospital and Group Health medical centers. Segment D is located within the Bel-Red subarea of Bellevue and the Overlake neighborhood of Redmond. A potential tail track could extend past the Overlake Transit Center or within the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway corridor near the Segment C/D connection. The preferred Alternative D2A has been modified from the 2008 draft EIS by shifting the route in the 120th Station area to the north, remaining adjacent to State Route (SR) 520 north of NE 24th Street and moving the Overlake Village Station along SR 520. Segment E travels parallel to SR 520 north and east into Downtown Redmond. The preferred Alternative E2 for this segment has been modified by replacing the Town Center Station and the Transit Center Station with one Downtown Station located midway between the two original stations, adding an 800-foot-long tail track for train layover and turnback operations, and discontinuing the alignment up 161st Avenue NE. The project may be constructed in phases beginning by 2013 to 2014, with the segment to Bellevue planned for opening by 2020 and to Overlake Transit Center planned for 2021. Segment E to Downtown Redmond is planned to be constructed after 2021. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The East Link LRT system would improve the speed and reliability of the regional transportation network and expand network capacity. Diversion of commuters and other travelers from automobiles to cleaner, more efficient rail transport would reduce congestion on regional highways and roads and reduce future air pollutant emissions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Project development would require the displacement of residences and businesses, land in recreational use, including parkland, and open space, as well as historically significant structures and archaeological sites. The transit facilities would alter visual aesthetics along the chosen corridors and utilities would have to be relocated in some areas. Construction workers would encounter hazardous waste sites. With respect to the natural environment, the project would impact wetlands and other wildlife habitats. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0079D, Volume 33, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100442, Executive Summary--36 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--347 pages, November 5, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Open Space KW - Parks KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 404(b) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Washington KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133364?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-05&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.title=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 5, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). [Part 9 of 24] T2 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). AN - 873132718; 14712-2_0009 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 18-mile eastern extension of light rail transit (LRT) is proposed to enhance transportation in the Central Puget Sound metropolitan region of King County, Washington. The East Link LRT Project would connect to the rail's system's initial segment in downtown Seattle and extend east to Mercer Island, Bellevue, and Redmond. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes new alternatives and design modifications and supplements the 2008 draft EIS for the project. The project corridor has been divided into five segments along distinct geographic boundaries. Alternatives considered include 24 build alternatives (one in Segment A, six in Segment B, ten in Segment C, four in Segment D, and three in Segment E), the No Build Alternative, and four maintenance facility alternatives (three in Segment D and one in Segment E). Each alternative route includes one to four stations; a total of 29 station options exist in the five segments. Segment A begins in the downtown Seattle transit Tunnel at the International District/Chinatown Station and extends eastward on Interstate 90 (I-90) across north Beacon Hill and Rainier Valley, then travels on the I-90 floating bridge across Lake Washington to Mercer Island. The 6.9-mile route remains on I-90 across Mercer Island and Lake Washington to south Bellevue. Segment B travels from the I-90 center roadway northward to approximately SE 6th Street. A new alternative in Segment B, the preferred 112th SE Modified Alternative (B2M), leaves the I-90 center roadway at Bellevue Way SE and continues north adjacent to Bellevue Way SE and then along 112th Avenue SE. Segment C extends between SE 6th and NE 12th Streets and transitions from the primarily suburban single-family residential and commercial area of south Bellevue to the dense, urban central business district of downtown Bellevue. Key destinations in Segment C are Bellevue's downtown core and transit center and, on the east side of I-405, the Overlake Hospital and Group Health medical centers. Segment D is located within the Bel-Red subarea of Bellevue and the Overlake neighborhood of Redmond. A potential tail track could extend past the Overlake Transit Center or within the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway corridor near the Segment C/D connection. The preferred Alternative D2A has been modified from the 2008 draft EIS by shifting the route in the 120th Station area to the north, remaining adjacent to State Route (SR) 520 north of NE 24th Street and moving the Overlake Village Station along SR 520. Segment E travels parallel to SR 520 north and east into Downtown Redmond. The preferred Alternative E2 for this segment has been modified by replacing the Town Center Station and the Transit Center Station with one Downtown Station located midway between the two original stations, adding an 800-foot-long tail track for train layover and turnback operations, and discontinuing the alignment up 161st Avenue NE. The project may be constructed in phases beginning by 2013 to 2014, with the segment to Bellevue planned for opening by 2020 and to Overlake Transit Center planned for 2021. Segment E to Downtown Redmond is planned to be constructed after 2021. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The East Link LRT system would improve the speed and reliability of the regional transportation network and expand network capacity. Diversion of commuters and other travelers from automobiles to cleaner, more efficient rail transport would reduce congestion on regional highways and roads and reduce future air pollutant emissions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Project development would require the displacement of residences and businesses, land in recreational use, including parkland, and open space, as well as historically significant structures and archaeological sites. The transit facilities would alter visual aesthetics along the chosen corridors and utilities would have to be relocated in some areas. Construction workers would encounter hazardous waste sites. With respect to the natural environment, the project would impact wetlands and other wildlife habitats. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0079D, Volume 33, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100442, Executive Summary--36 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--347 pages, November 5, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Open Space KW - Parks KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 404(b) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Washington KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132718?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-05&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.title=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 5, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). [Part 8 of 24] T2 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). AN - 873132716; 14712-2_0008 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 18-mile eastern extension of light rail transit (LRT) is proposed to enhance transportation in the Central Puget Sound metropolitan region of King County, Washington. The East Link LRT Project would connect to the rail's system's initial segment in downtown Seattle and extend east to Mercer Island, Bellevue, and Redmond. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes new alternatives and design modifications and supplements the 2008 draft EIS for the project. The project corridor has been divided into five segments along distinct geographic boundaries. Alternatives considered include 24 build alternatives (one in Segment A, six in Segment B, ten in Segment C, four in Segment D, and three in Segment E), the No Build Alternative, and four maintenance facility alternatives (three in Segment D and one in Segment E). Each alternative route includes one to four stations; a total of 29 station options exist in the five segments. Segment A begins in the downtown Seattle transit Tunnel at the International District/Chinatown Station and extends eastward on Interstate 90 (I-90) across north Beacon Hill and Rainier Valley, then travels on the I-90 floating bridge across Lake Washington to Mercer Island. The 6.9-mile route remains on I-90 across Mercer Island and Lake Washington to south Bellevue. Segment B travels from the I-90 center roadway northward to approximately SE 6th Street. A new alternative in Segment B, the preferred 112th SE Modified Alternative (B2M), leaves the I-90 center roadway at Bellevue Way SE and continues north adjacent to Bellevue Way SE and then along 112th Avenue SE. Segment C extends between SE 6th and NE 12th Streets and transitions from the primarily suburban single-family residential and commercial area of south Bellevue to the dense, urban central business district of downtown Bellevue. Key destinations in Segment C are Bellevue's downtown core and transit center and, on the east side of I-405, the Overlake Hospital and Group Health medical centers. Segment D is located within the Bel-Red subarea of Bellevue and the Overlake neighborhood of Redmond. A potential tail track could extend past the Overlake Transit Center or within the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway corridor near the Segment C/D connection. The preferred Alternative D2A has been modified from the 2008 draft EIS by shifting the route in the 120th Station area to the north, remaining adjacent to State Route (SR) 520 north of NE 24th Street and moving the Overlake Village Station along SR 520. Segment E travels parallel to SR 520 north and east into Downtown Redmond. The preferred Alternative E2 for this segment has been modified by replacing the Town Center Station and the Transit Center Station with one Downtown Station located midway between the two original stations, adding an 800-foot-long tail track for train layover and turnback operations, and discontinuing the alignment up 161st Avenue NE. The project may be constructed in phases beginning by 2013 to 2014, with the segment to Bellevue planned for opening by 2020 and to Overlake Transit Center planned for 2021. Segment E to Downtown Redmond is planned to be constructed after 2021. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The East Link LRT system would improve the speed and reliability of the regional transportation network and expand network capacity. Diversion of commuters and other travelers from automobiles to cleaner, more efficient rail transport would reduce congestion on regional highways and roads and reduce future air pollutant emissions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Project development would require the displacement of residences and businesses, land in recreational use, including parkland, and open space, as well as historically significant structures and archaeological sites. The transit facilities would alter visual aesthetics along the chosen corridors and utilities would have to be relocated in some areas. Construction workers would encounter hazardous waste sites. With respect to the natural environment, the project would impact wetlands and other wildlife habitats. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0079D, Volume 33, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100442, Executive Summary--36 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--347 pages, November 5, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Open Space KW - Parks KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 404(b) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Washington KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132716?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-05&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.title=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 5, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). [Part 7 of 24] T2 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). AN - 873132712; 14712-2_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 18-mile eastern extension of light rail transit (LRT) is proposed to enhance transportation in the Central Puget Sound metropolitan region of King County, Washington. The East Link LRT Project would connect to the rail's system's initial segment in downtown Seattle and extend east to Mercer Island, Bellevue, and Redmond. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes new alternatives and design modifications and supplements the 2008 draft EIS for the project. The project corridor has been divided into five segments along distinct geographic boundaries. Alternatives considered include 24 build alternatives (one in Segment A, six in Segment B, ten in Segment C, four in Segment D, and three in Segment E), the No Build Alternative, and four maintenance facility alternatives (three in Segment D and one in Segment E). Each alternative route includes one to four stations; a total of 29 station options exist in the five segments. Segment A begins in the downtown Seattle transit Tunnel at the International District/Chinatown Station and extends eastward on Interstate 90 (I-90) across north Beacon Hill and Rainier Valley, then travels on the I-90 floating bridge across Lake Washington to Mercer Island. The 6.9-mile route remains on I-90 across Mercer Island and Lake Washington to south Bellevue. Segment B travels from the I-90 center roadway northward to approximately SE 6th Street. A new alternative in Segment B, the preferred 112th SE Modified Alternative (B2M), leaves the I-90 center roadway at Bellevue Way SE and continues north adjacent to Bellevue Way SE and then along 112th Avenue SE. Segment C extends between SE 6th and NE 12th Streets and transitions from the primarily suburban single-family residential and commercial area of south Bellevue to the dense, urban central business district of downtown Bellevue. Key destinations in Segment C are Bellevue's downtown core and transit center and, on the east side of I-405, the Overlake Hospital and Group Health medical centers. Segment D is located within the Bel-Red subarea of Bellevue and the Overlake neighborhood of Redmond. A potential tail track could extend past the Overlake Transit Center or within the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway corridor near the Segment C/D connection. The preferred Alternative D2A has been modified from the 2008 draft EIS by shifting the route in the 120th Station area to the north, remaining adjacent to State Route (SR) 520 north of NE 24th Street and moving the Overlake Village Station along SR 520. Segment E travels parallel to SR 520 north and east into Downtown Redmond. The preferred Alternative E2 for this segment has been modified by replacing the Town Center Station and the Transit Center Station with one Downtown Station located midway between the two original stations, adding an 800-foot-long tail track for train layover and turnback operations, and discontinuing the alignment up 161st Avenue NE. The project may be constructed in phases beginning by 2013 to 2014, with the segment to Bellevue planned for opening by 2020 and to Overlake Transit Center planned for 2021. Segment E to Downtown Redmond is planned to be constructed after 2021. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The East Link LRT system would improve the speed and reliability of the regional transportation network and expand network capacity. Diversion of commuters and other travelers from automobiles to cleaner, more efficient rail transport would reduce congestion on regional highways and roads and reduce future air pollutant emissions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Project development would require the displacement of residences and businesses, land in recreational use, including parkland, and open space, as well as historically significant structures and archaeological sites. The transit facilities would alter visual aesthetics along the chosen corridors and utilities would have to be relocated in some areas. Construction workers would encounter hazardous waste sites. With respect to the natural environment, the project would impact wetlands and other wildlife habitats. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0079D, Volume 33, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100442, Executive Summary--36 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--347 pages, November 5, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Open Space KW - Parks KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 404(b) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Washington KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132712?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-05&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.title=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 5, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). [Part 21 of 24] T2 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). AN - 873132649; 14712-2_0021 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 18-mile eastern extension of light rail transit (LRT) is proposed to enhance transportation in the Central Puget Sound metropolitan region of King County, Washington. The East Link LRT Project would connect to the rail's system's initial segment in downtown Seattle and extend east to Mercer Island, Bellevue, and Redmond. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes new alternatives and design modifications and supplements the 2008 draft EIS for the project. The project corridor has been divided into five segments along distinct geographic boundaries. Alternatives considered include 24 build alternatives (one in Segment A, six in Segment B, ten in Segment C, four in Segment D, and three in Segment E), the No Build Alternative, and four maintenance facility alternatives (three in Segment D and one in Segment E). Each alternative route includes one to four stations; a total of 29 station options exist in the five segments. Segment A begins in the downtown Seattle transit Tunnel at the International District/Chinatown Station and extends eastward on Interstate 90 (I-90) across north Beacon Hill and Rainier Valley, then travels on the I-90 floating bridge across Lake Washington to Mercer Island. The 6.9-mile route remains on I-90 across Mercer Island and Lake Washington to south Bellevue. Segment B travels from the I-90 center roadway northward to approximately SE 6th Street. A new alternative in Segment B, the preferred 112th SE Modified Alternative (B2M), leaves the I-90 center roadway at Bellevue Way SE and continues north adjacent to Bellevue Way SE and then along 112th Avenue SE. Segment C extends between SE 6th and NE 12th Streets and transitions from the primarily suburban single-family residential and commercial area of south Bellevue to the dense, urban central business district of downtown Bellevue. Key destinations in Segment C are Bellevue's downtown core and transit center and, on the east side of I-405, the Overlake Hospital and Group Health medical centers. Segment D is located within the Bel-Red subarea of Bellevue and the Overlake neighborhood of Redmond. A potential tail track could extend past the Overlake Transit Center or within the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway corridor near the Segment C/D connection. The preferred Alternative D2A has been modified from the 2008 draft EIS by shifting the route in the 120th Station area to the north, remaining adjacent to State Route (SR) 520 north of NE 24th Street and moving the Overlake Village Station along SR 520. Segment E travels parallel to SR 520 north and east into Downtown Redmond. The preferred Alternative E2 for this segment has been modified by replacing the Town Center Station and the Transit Center Station with one Downtown Station located midway between the two original stations, adding an 800-foot-long tail track for train layover and turnback operations, and discontinuing the alignment up 161st Avenue NE. The project may be constructed in phases beginning by 2013 to 2014, with the segment to Bellevue planned for opening by 2020 and to Overlake Transit Center planned for 2021. Segment E to Downtown Redmond is planned to be constructed after 2021. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The East Link LRT system would improve the speed and reliability of the regional transportation network and expand network capacity. Diversion of commuters and other travelers from automobiles to cleaner, more efficient rail transport would reduce congestion on regional highways and roads and reduce future air pollutant emissions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Project development would require the displacement of residences and businesses, land in recreational use, including parkland, and open space, as well as historically significant structures and archaeological sites. The transit facilities would alter visual aesthetics along the chosen corridors and utilities would have to be relocated in some areas. Construction workers would encounter hazardous waste sites. With respect to the natural environment, the project would impact wetlands and other wildlife habitats. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0079D, Volume 33, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100442, Executive Summary--36 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--347 pages, November 5, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 21 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Open Space KW - Parks KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 404(b) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Washington KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132649?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-05&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.title=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 5, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). [Part 11 of 24] T2 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). AN - 873132023; 14712-2_0011 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 18-mile eastern extension of light rail transit (LRT) is proposed to enhance transportation in the Central Puget Sound metropolitan region of King County, Washington. The East Link LRT Project would connect to the rail's system's initial segment in downtown Seattle and extend east to Mercer Island, Bellevue, and Redmond. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes new alternatives and design modifications and supplements the 2008 draft EIS for the project. The project corridor has been divided into five segments along distinct geographic boundaries. Alternatives considered include 24 build alternatives (one in Segment A, six in Segment B, ten in Segment C, four in Segment D, and three in Segment E), the No Build Alternative, and four maintenance facility alternatives (three in Segment D and one in Segment E). Each alternative route includes one to four stations; a total of 29 station options exist in the five segments. Segment A begins in the downtown Seattle transit Tunnel at the International District/Chinatown Station and extends eastward on Interstate 90 (I-90) across north Beacon Hill and Rainier Valley, then travels on the I-90 floating bridge across Lake Washington to Mercer Island. The 6.9-mile route remains on I-90 across Mercer Island and Lake Washington to south Bellevue. Segment B travels from the I-90 center roadway northward to approximately SE 6th Street. A new alternative in Segment B, the preferred 112th SE Modified Alternative (B2M), leaves the I-90 center roadway at Bellevue Way SE and continues north adjacent to Bellevue Way SE and then along 112th Avenue SE. Segment C extends between SE 6th and NE 12th Streets and transitions from the primarily suburban single-family residential and commercial area of south Bellevue to the dense, urban central business district of downtown Bellevue. Key destinations in Segment C are Bellevue's downtown core and transit center and, on the east side of I-405, the Overlake Hospital and Group Health medical centers. Segment D is located within the Bel-Red subarea of Bellevue and the Overlake neighborhood of Redmond. A potential tail track could extend past the Overlake Transit Center or within the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway corridor near the Segment C/D connection. The preferred Alternative D2A has been modified from the 2008 draft EIS by shifting the route in the 120th Station area to the north, remaining adjacent to State Route (SR) 520 north of NE 24th Street and moving the Overlake Village Station along SR 520. Segment E travels parallel to SR 520 north and east into Downtown Redmond. The preferred Alternative E2 for this segment has been modified by replacing the Town Center Station and the Transit Center Station with one Downtown Station located midway between the two original stations, adding an 800-foot-long tail track for train layover and turnback operations, and discontinuing the alignment up 161st Avenue NE. The project may be constructed in phases beginning by 2013 to 2014, with the segment to Bellevue planned for opening by 2020 and to Overlake Transit Center planned for 2021. Segment E to Downtown Redmond is planned to be constructed after 2021. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The East Link LRT system would improve the speed and reliability of the regional transportation network and expand network capacity. Diversion of commuters and other travelers from automobiles to cleaner, more efficient rail transport would reduce congestion on regional highways and roads and reduce future air pollutant emissions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Project development would require the displacement of residences and businesses, land in recreational use, including parkland, and open space, as well as historically significant structures and archaeological sites. The transit facilities would alter visual aesthetics along the chosen corridors and utilities would have to be relocated in some areas. Construction workers would encounter hazardous waste sites. With respect to the natural environment, the project would impact wetlands and other wildlife habitats. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0079D, Volume 33, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100442, Executive Summary--36 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--347 pages, November 5, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Open Space KW - Parks KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 404(b) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Washington KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132023?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-05&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.title=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 5, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). [Part 10 of 24] T2 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). AN - 873132017; 14712-2_0010 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 18-mile eastern extension of light rail transit (LRT) is proposed to enhance transportation in the Central Puget Sound metropolitan region of King County, Washington. The East Link LRT Project would connect to the rail's system's initial segment in downtown Seattle and extend east to Mercer Island, Bellevue, and Redmond. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes new alternatives and design modifications and supplements the 2008 draft EIS for the project. The project corridor has been divided into five segments along distinct geographic boundaries. Alternatives considered include 24 build alternatives (one in Segment A, six in Segment B, ten in Segment C, four in Segment D, and three in Segment E), the No Build Alternative, and four maintenance facility alternatives (three in Segment D and one in Segment E). Each alternative route includes one to four stations; a total of 29 station options exist in the five segments. Segment A begins in the downtown Seattle transit Tunnel at the International District/Chinatown Station and extends eastward on Interstate 90 (I-90) across north Beacon Hill and Rainier Valley, then travels on the I-90 floating bridge across Lake Washington to Mercer Island. The 6.9-mile route remains on I-90 across Mercer Island and Lake Washington to south Bellevue. Segment B travels from the I-90 center roadway northward to approximately SE 6th Street. A new alternative in Segment B, the preferred 112th SE Modified Alternative (B2M), leaves the I-90 center roadway at Bellevue Way SE and continues north adjacent to Bellevue Way SE and then along 112th Avenue SE. Segment C extends between SE 6th and NE 12th Streets and transitions from the primarily suburban single-family residential and commercial area of south Bellevue to the dense, urban central business district of downtown Bellevue. Key destinations in Segment C are Bellevue's downtown core and transit center and, on the east side of I-405, the Overlake Hospital and Group Health medical centers. Segment D is located within the Bel-Red subarea of Bellevue and the Overlake neighborhood of Redmond. A potential tail track could extend past the Overlake Transit Center or within the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway corridor near the Segment C/D connection. The preferred Alternative D2A has been modified from the 2008 draft EIS by shifting the route in the 120th Station area to the north, remaining adjacent to State Route (SR) 520 north of NE 24th Street and moving the Overlake Village Station along SR 520. Segment E travels parallel to SR 520 north and east into Downtown Redmond. The preferred Alternative E2 for this segment has been modified by replacing the Town Center Station and the Transit Center Station with one Downtown Station located midway between the two original stations, adding an 800-foot-long tail track for train layover and turnback operations, and discontinuing the alignment up 161st Avenue NE. The project may be constructed in phases beginning by 2013 to 2014, with the segment to Bellevue planned for opening by 2020 and to Overlake Transit Center planned for 2021. Segment E to Downtown Redmond is planned to be constructed after 2021. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The East Link LRT system would improve the speed and reliability of the regional transportation network and expand network capacity. Diversion of commuters and other travelers from automobiles to cleaner, more efficient rail transport would reduce congestion on regional highways and roads and reduce future air pollutant emissions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Project development would require the displacement of residences and businesses, land in recreational use, including parkland, and open space, as well as historically significant structures and archaeological sites. The transit facilities would alter visual aesthetics along the chosen corridors and utilities would have to be relocated in some areas. Construction workers would encounter hazardous waste sites. With respect to the natural environment, the project would impact wetlands and other wildlife habitats. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0079D, Volume 33, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100442, Executive Summary--36 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--347 pages, November 5, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Open Space KW - Parks KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 404(b) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Washington KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132017?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-05&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.title=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 5, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). [Part 18 of 24] T2 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). AN - 873131709; 14712-2_0018 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 18-mile eastern extension of light rail transit (LRT) is proposed to enhance transportation in the Central Puget Sound metropolitan region of King County, Washington. The East Link LRT Project would connect to the rail's system's initial segment in downtown Seattle and extend east to Mercer Island, Bellevue, and Redmond. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes new alternatives and design modifications and supplements the 2008 draft EIS for the project. The project corridor has been divided into five segments along distinct geographic boundaries. Alternatives considered include 24 build alternatives (one in Segment A, six in Segment B, ten in Segment C, four in Segment D, and three in Segment E), the No Build Alternative, and four maintenance facility alternatives (three in Segment D and one in Segment E). Each alternative route includes one to four stations; a total of 29 station options exist in the five segments. Segment A begins in the downtown Seattle transit Tunnel at the International District/Chinatown Station and extends eastward on Interstate 90 (I-90) across north Beacon Hill and Rainier Valley, then travels on the I-90 floating bridge across Lake Washington to Mercer Island. The 6.9-mile route remains on I-90 across Mercer Island and Lake Washington to south Bellevue. Segment B travels from the I-90 center roadway northward to approximately SE 6th Street. A new alternative in Segment B, the preferred 112th SE Modified Alternative (B2M), leaves the I-90 center roadway at Bellevue Way SE and continues north adjacent to Bellevue Way SE and then along 112th Avenue SE. Segment C extends between SE 6th and NE 12th Streets and transitions from the primarily suburban single-family residential and commercial area of south Bellevue to the dense, urban central business district of downtown Bellevue. Key destinations in Segment C are Bellevue's downtown core and transit center and, on the east side of I-405, the Overlake Hospital and Group Health medical centers. Segment D is located within the Bel-Red subarea of Bellevue and the Overlake neighborhood of Redmond. A potential tail track could extend past the Overlake Transit Center or within the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway corridor near the Segment C/D connection. The preferred Alternative D2A has been modified from the 2008 draft EIS by shifting the route in the 120th Station area to the north, remaining adjacent to State Route (SR) 520 north of NE 24th Street and moving the Overlake Village Station along SR 520. Segment E travels parallel to SR 520 north and east into Downtown Redmond. The preferred Alternative E2 for this segment has been modified by replacing the Town Center Station and the Transit Center Station with one Downtown Station located midway between the two original stations, adding an 800-foot-long tail track for train layover and turnback operations, and discontinuing the alignment up 161st Avenue NE. The project may be constructed in phases beginning by 2013 to 2014, with the segment to Bellevue planned for opening by 2020 and to Overlake Transit Center planned for 2021. Segment E to Downtown Redmond is planned to be constructed after 2021. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The East Link LRT system would improve the speed and reliability of the regional transportation network and expand network capacity. Diversion of commuters and other travelers from automobiles to cleaner, more efficient rail transport would reduce congestion on regional highways and roads and reduce future air pollutant emissions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Project development would require the displacement of residences and businesses, land in recreational use, including parkland, and open space, as well as historically significant structures and archaeological sites. The transit facilities would alter visual aesthetics along the chosen corridors and utilities would have to be relocated in some areas. Construction workers would encounter hazardous waste sites. With respect to the natural environment, the project would impact wetlands and other wildlife habitats. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0079D, Volume 33, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100442, Executive Summary--36 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--347 pages, November 5, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 18 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Open Space KW - Parks KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 404(b) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Washington KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131709?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-05&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.title=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 5, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). [Part 17 of 24] T2 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). AN - 873131705; 14712-2_0017 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 18-mile eastern extension of light rail transit (LRT) is proposed to enhance transportation in the Central Puget Sound metropolitan region of King County, Washington. The East Link LRT Project would connect to the rail's system's initial segment in downtown Seattle and extend east to Mercer Island, Bellevue, and Redmond. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes new alternatives and design modifications and supplements the 2008 draft EIS for the project. The project corridor has been divided into five segments along distinct geographic boundaries. Alternatives considered include 24 build alternatives (one in Segment A, six in Segment B, ten in Segment C, four in Segment D, and three in Segment E), the No Build Alternative, and four maintenance facility alternatives (three in Segment D and one in Segment E). Each alternative route includes one to four stations; a total of 29 station options exist in the five segments. Segment A begins in the downtown Seattle transit Tunnel at the International District/Chinatown Station and extends eastward on Interstate 90 (I-90) across north Beacon Hill and Rainier Valley, then travels on the I-90 floating bridge across Lake Washington to Mercer Island. The 6.9-mile route remains on I-90 across Mercer Island and Lake Washington to south Bellevue. Segment B travels from the I-90 center roadway northward to approximately SE 6th Street. A new alternative in Segment B, the preferred 112th SE Modified Alternative (B2M), leaves the I-90 center roadway at Bellevue Way SE and continues north adjacent to Bellevue Way SE and then along 112th Avenue SE. Segment C extends between SE 6th and NE 12th Streets and transitions from the primarily suburban single-family residential and commercial area of south Bellevue to the dense, urban central business district of downtown Bellevue. Key destinations in Segment C are Bellevue's downtown core and transit center and, on the east side of I-405, the Overlake Hospital and Group Health medical centers. Segment D is located within the Bel-Red subarea of Bellevue and the Overlake neighborhood of Redmond. A potential tail track could extend past the Overlake Transit Center or within the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway corridor near the Segment C/D connection. The preferred Alternative D2A has been modified from the 2008 draft EIS by shifting the route in the 120th Station area to the north, remaining adjacent to State Route (SR) 520 north of NE 24th Street and moving the Overlake Village Station along SR 520. Segment E travels parallel to SR 520 north and east into Downtown Redmond. The preferred Alternative E2 for this segment has been modified by replacing the Town Center Station and the Transit Center Station with one Downtown Station located midway between the two original stations, adding an 800-foot-long tail track for train layover and turnback operations, and discontinuing the alignment up 161st Avenue NE. The project may be constructed in phases beginning by 2013 to 2014, with the segment to Bellevue planned for opening by 2020 and to Overlake Transit Center planned for 2021. Segment E to Downtown Redmond is planned to be constructed after 2021. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The East Link LRT system would improve the speed and reliability of the regional transportation network and expand network capacity. Diversion of commuters and other travelers from automobiles to cleaner, more efficient rail transport would reduce congestion on regional highways and roads and reduce future air pollutant emissions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Project development would require the displacement of residences and businesses, land in recreational use, including parkland, and open space, as well as historically significant structures and archaeological sites. The transit facilities would alter visual aesthetics along the chosen corridors and utilities would have to be relocated in some areas. Construction workers would encounter hazardous waste sites. With respect to the natural environment, the project would impact wetlands and other wildlife habitats. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0079D, Volume 33, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100442, Executive Summary--36 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--347 pages, November 5, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 17 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Open Space KW - Parks KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 404(b) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Washington KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131705?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-05&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.title=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 5, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). [Part 16 of 24] T2 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). AN - 873131701; 14712-2_0016 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 18-mile eastern extension of light rail transit (LRT) is proposed to enhance transportation in the Central Puget Sound metropolitan region of King County, Washington. The East Link LRT Project would connect to the rail's system's initial segment in downtown Seattle and extend east to Mercer Island, Bellevue, and Redmond. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes new alternatives and design modifications and supplements the 2008 draft EIS for the project. The project corridor has been divided into five segments along distinct geographic boundaries. Alternatives considered include 24 build alternatives (one in Segment A, six in Segment B, ten in Segment C, four in Segment D, and three in Segment E), the No Build Alternative, and four maintenance facility alternatives (three in Segment D and one in Segment E). Each alternative route includes one to four stations; a total of 29 station options exist in the five segments. Segment A begins in the downtown Seattle transit Tunnel at the International District/Chinatown Station and extends eastward on Interstate 90 (I-90) across north Beacon Hill and Rainier Valley, then travels on the I-90 floating bridge across Lake Washington to Mercer Island. The 6.9-mile route remains on I-90 across Mercer Island and Lake Washington to south Bellevue. Segment B travels from the I-90 center roadway northward to approximately SE 6th Street. A new alternative in Segment B, the preferred 112th SE Modified Alternative (B2M), leaves the I-90 center roadway at Bellevue Way SE and continues north adjacent to Bellevue Way SE and then along 112th Avenue SE. Segment C extends between SE 6th and NE 12th Streets and transitions from the primarily suburban single-family residential and commercial area of south Bellevue to the dense, urban central business district of downtown Bellevue. Key destinations in Segment C are Bellevue's downtown core and transit center and, on the east side of I-405, the Overlake Hospital and Group Health medical centers. Segment D is located within the Bel-Red subarea of Bellevue and the Overlake neighborhood of Redmond. A potential tail track could extend past the Overlake Transit Center or within the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway corridor near the Segment C/D connection. The preferred Alternative D2A has been modified from the 2008 draft EIS by shifting the route in the 120th Station area to the north, remaining adjacent to State Route (SR) 520 north of NE 24th Street and moving the Overlake Village Station along SR 520. Segment E travels parallel to SR 520 north and east into Downtown Redmond. The preferred Alternative E2 for this segment has been modified by replacing the Town Center Station and the Transit Center Station with one Downtown Station located midway between the two original stations, adding an 800-foot-long tail track for train layover and turnback operations, and discontinuing the alignment up 161st Avenue NE. The project may be constructed in phases beginning by 2013 to 2014, with the segment to Bellevue planned for opening by 2020 and to Overlake Transit Center planned for 2021. Segment E to Downtown Redmond is planned to be constructed after 2021. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The East Link LRT system would improve the speed and reliability of the regional transportation network and expand network capacity. Diversion of commuters and other travelers from automobiles to cleaner, more efficient rail transport would reduce congestion on regional highways and roads and reduce future air pollutant emissions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Project development would require the displacement of residences and businesses, land in recreational use, including parkland, and open space, as well as historically significant structures and archaeological sites. The transit facilities would alter visual aesthetics along the chosen corridors and utilities would have to be relocated in some areas. Construction workers would encounter hazardous waste sites. With respect to the natural environment, the project would impact wetlands and other wildlife habitats. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0079D, Volume 33, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100442, Executive Summary--36 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--347 pages, November 5, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 16 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Open Space KW - Parks KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 404(b) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Washington KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131701?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-05&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.title=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 5, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). [Part 15 of 24] T2 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). AN - 873131694; 14712-2_0015 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 18-mile eastern extension of light rail transit (LRT) is proposed to enhance transportation in the Central Puget Sound metropolitan region of King County, Washington. The East Link LRT Project would connect to the rail's system's initial segment in downtown Seattle and extend east to Mercer Island, Bellevue, and Redmond. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes new alternatives and design modifications and supplements the 2008 draft EIS for the project. The project corridor has been divided into five segments along distinct geographic boundaries. Alternatives considered include 24 build alternatives (one in Segment A, six in Segment B, ten in Segment C, four in Segment D, and three in Segment E), the No Build Alternative, and four maintenance facility alternatives (three in Segment D and one in Segment E). Each alternative route includes one to four stations; a total of 29 station options exist in the five segments. Segment A begins in the downtown Seattle transit Tunnel at the International District/Chinatown Station and extends eastward on Interstate 90 (I-90) across north Beacon Hill and Rainier Valley, then travels on the I-90 floating bridge across Lake Washington to Mercer Island. The 6.9-mile route remains on I-90 across Mercer Island and Lake Washington to south Bellevue. Segment B travels from the I-90 center roadway northward to approximately SE 6th Street. A new alternative in Segment B, the preferred 112th SE Modified Alternative (B2M), leaves the I-90 center roadway at Bellevue Way SE and continues north adjacent to Bellevue Way SE and then along 112th Avenue SE. Segment C extends between SE 6th and NE 12th Streets and transitions from the primarily suburban single-family residential and commercial area of south Bellevue to the dense, urban central business district of downtown Bellevue. Key destinations in Segment C are Bellevue's downtown core and transit center and, on the east side of I-405, the Overlake Hospital and Group Health medical centers. Segment D is located within the Bel-Red subarea of Bellevue and the Overlake neighborhood of Redmond. A potential tail track could extend past the Overlake Transit Center or within the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway corridor near the Segment C/D connection. The preferred Alternative D2A has been modified from the 2008 draft EIS by shifting the route in the 120th Station area to the north, remaining adjacent to State Route (SR) 520 north of NE 24th Street and moving the Overlake Village Station along SR 520. Segment E travels parallel to SR 520 north and east into Downtown Redmond. The preferred Alternative E2 for this segment has been modified by replacing the Town Center Station and the Transit Center Station with one Downtown Station located midway between the two original stations, adding an 800-foot-long tail track for train layover and turnback operations, and discontinuing the alignment up 161st Avenue NE. The project may be constructed in phases beginning by 2013 to 2014, with the segment to Bellevue planned for opening by 2020 and to Overlake Transit Center planned for 2021. Segment E to Downtown Redmond is planned to be constructed after 2021. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The East Link LRT system would improve the speed and reliability of the regional transportation network and expand network capacity. Diversion of commuters and other travelers from automobiles to cleaner, more efficient rail transport would reduce congestion on regional highways and roads and reduce future air pollutant emissions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Project development would require the displacement of residences and businesses, land in recreational use, including parkland, and open space, as well as historically significant structures and archaeological sites. The transit facilities would alter visual aesthetics along the chosen corridors and utilities would have to be relocated in some areas. Construction workers would encounter hazardous waste sites. With respect to the natural environment, the project would impact wetlands and other wildlife habitats. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0079D, Volume 33, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100442, Executive Summary--36 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--347 pages, November 5, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Open Space KW - Parks KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 404(b) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Washington KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131694?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-05&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.title=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 5, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). [Part 14 of 24] T2 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). AN - 873131692; 14712-2_0014 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 18-mile eastern extension of light rail transit (LRT) is proposed to enhance transportation in the Central Puget Sound metropolitan region of King County, Washington. The East Link LRT Project would connect to the rail's system's initial segment in downtown Seattle and extend east to Mercer Island, Bellevue, and Redmond. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes new alternatives and design modifications and supplements the 2008 draft EIS for the project. The project corridor has been divided into five segments along distinct geographic boundaries. Alternatives considered include 24 build alternatives (one in Segment A, six in Segment B, ten in Segment C, four in Segment D, and three in Segment E), the No Build Alternative, and four maintenance facility alternatives (three in Segment D and one in Segment E). Each alternative route includes one to four stations; a total of 29 station options exist in the five segments. Segment A begins in the downtown Seattle transit Tunnel at the International District/Chinatown Station and extends eastward on Interstate 90 (I-90) across north Beacon Hill and Rainier Valley, then travels on the I-90 floating bridge across Lake Washington to Mercer Island. The 6.9-mile route remains on I-90 across Mercer Island and Lake Washington to south Bellevue. Segment B travels from the I-90 center roadway northward to approximately SE 6th Street. A new alternative in Segment B, the preferred 112th SE Modified Alternative (B2M), leaves the I-90 center roadway at Bellevue Way SE and continues north adjacent to Bellevue Way SE and then along 112th Avenue SE. Segment C extends between SE 6th and NE 12th Streets and transitions from the primarily suburban single-family residential and commercial area of south Bellevue to the dense, urban central business district of downtown Bellevue. Key destinations in Segment C are Bellevue's downtown core and transit center and, on the east side of I-405, the Overlake Hospital and Group Health medical centers. Segment D is located within the Bel-Red subarea of Bellevue and the Overlake neighborhood of Redmond. A potential tail track could extend past the Overlake Transit Center or within the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway corridor near the Segment C/D connection. The preferred Alternative D2A has been modified from the 2008 draft EIS by shifting the route in the 120th Station area to the north, remaining adjacent to State Route (SR) 520 north of NE 24th Street and moving the Overlake Village Station along SR 520. Segment E travels parallel to SR 520 north and east into Downtown Redmond. The preferred Alternative E2 for this segment has been modified by replacing the Town Center Station and the Transit Center Station with one Downtown Station located midway between the two original stations, adding an 800-foot-long tail track for train layover and turnback operations, and discontinuing the alignment up 161st Avenue NE. The project may be constructed in phases beginning by 2013 to 2014, with the segment to Bellevue planned for opening by 2020 and to Overlake Transit Center planned for 2021. Segment E to Downtown Redmond is planned to be constructed after 2021. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The East Link LRT system would improve the speed and reliability of the regional transportation network and expand network capacity. Diversion of commuters and other travelers from automobiles to cleaner, more efficient rail transport would reduce congestion on regional highways and roads and reduce future air pollutant emissions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Project development would require the displacement of residences and businesses, land in recreational use, including parkland, and open space, as well as historically significant structures and archaeological sites. The transit facilities would alter visual aesthetics along the chosen corridors and utilities would have to be relocated in some areas. Construction workers would encounter hazardous waste sites. With respect to the natural environment, the project would impact wetlands and other wildlife habitats. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0079D, Volume 33, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100442, Executive Summary--36 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--347 pages, November 5, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Open Space KW - Parks KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 404(b) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Washington KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131692?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-05&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.title=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 5, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). [Part 12 of 24] T2 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). AN - 873131688; 14712-2_0012 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 18-mile eastern extension of light rail transit (LRT) is proposed to enhance transportation in the Central Puget Sound metropolitan region of King County, Washington. The East Link LRT Project would connect to the rail's system's initial segment in downtown Seattle and extend east to Mercer Island, Bellevue, and Redmond. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes new alternatives and design modifications and supplements the 2008 draft EIS for the project. The project corridor has been divided into five segments along distinct geographic boundaries. Alternatives considered include 24 build alternatives (one in Segment A, six in Segment B, ten in Segment C, four in Segment D, and three in Segment E), the No Build Alternative, and four maintenance facility alternatives (three in Segment D and one in Segment E). Each alternative route includes one to four stations; a total of 29 station options exist in the five segments. Segment A begins in the downtown Seattle transit Tunnel at the International District/Chinatown Station and extends eastward on Interstate 90 (I-90) across north Beacon Hill and Rainier Valley, then travels on the I-90 floating bridge across Lake Washington to Mercer Island. The 6.9-mile route remains on I-90 across Mercer Island and Lake Washington to south Bellevue. Segment B travels from the I-90 center roadway northward to approximately SE 6th Street. A new alternative in Segment B, the preferred 112th SE Modified Alternative (B2M), leaves the I-90 center roadway at Bellevue Way SE and continues north adjacent to Bellevue Way SE and then along 112th Avenue SE. Segment C extends between SE 6th and NE 12th Streets and transitions from the primarily suburban single-family residential and commercial area of south Bellevue to the dense, urban central business district of downtown Bellevue. Key destinations in Segment C are Bellevue's downtown core and transit center and, on the east side of I-405, the Overlake Hospital and Group Health medical centers. Segment D is located within the Bel-Red subarea of Bellevue and the Overlake neighborhood of Redmond. A potential tail track could extend past the Overlake Transit Center or within the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway corridor near the Segment C/D connection. The preferred Alternative D2A has been modified from the 2008 draft EIS by shifting the route in the 120th Station area to the north, remaining adjacent to State Route (SR) 520 north of NE 24th Street and moving the Overlake Village Station along SR 520. Segment E travels parallel to SR 520 north and east into Downtown Redmond. The preferred Alternative E2 for this segment has been modified by replacing the Town Center Station and the Transit Center Station with one Downtown Station located midway between the two original stations, adding an 800-foot-long tail track for train layover and turnback operations, and discontinuing the alignment up 161st Avenue NE. The project may be constructed in phases beginning by 2013 to 2014, with the segment to Bellevue planned for opening by 2020 and to Overlake Transit Center planned for 2021. Segment E to Downtown Redmond is planned to be constructed after 2021. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The East Link LRT system would improve the speed and reliability of the regional transportation network and expand network capacity. Diversion of commuters and other travelers from automobiles to cleaner, more efficient rail transport would reduce congestion on regional highways and roads and reduce future air pollutant emissions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Project development would require the displacement of residences and businesses, land in recreational use, including parkland, and open space, as well as historically significant structures and archaeological sites. The transit facilities would alter visual aesthetics along the chosen corridors and utilities would have to be relocated in some areas. Construction workers would encounter hazardous waste sites. With respect to the natural environment, the project would impact wetlands and other wildlife habitats. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0079D, Volume 33, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100442, Executive Summary--36 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--347 pages, November 5, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Open Space KW - Parks KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 404(b) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Washington KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131688?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-05&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.title=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 5, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). [Part 24 of 24] T2 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). AN - 873130427; 14712-2_0024 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 18-mile eastern extension of light rail transit (LRT) is proposed to enhance transportation in the Central Puget Sound metropolitan region of King County, Washington. The East Link LRT Project would connect to the rail's system's initial segment in downtown Seattle and extend east to Mercer Island, Bellevue, and Redmond. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes new alternatives and design modifications and supplements the 2008 draft EIS for the project. The project corridor has been divided into five segments along distinct geographic boundaries. Alternatives considered include 24 build alternatives (one in Segment A, six in Segment B, ten in Segment C, four in Segment D, and three in Segment E), the No Build Alternative, and four maintenance facility alternatives (three in Segment D and one in Segment E). Each alternative route includes one to four stations; a total of 29 station options exist in the five segments. Segment A begins in the downtown Seattle transit Tunnel at the International District/Chinatown Station and extends eastward on Interstate 90 (I-90) across north Beacon Hill and Rainier Valley, then travels on the I-90 floating bridge across Lake Washington to Mercer Island. The 6.9-mile route remains on I-90 across Mercer Island and Lake Washington to south Bellevue. Segment B travels from the I-90 center roadway northward to approximately SE 6th Street. A new alternative in Segment B, the preferred 112th SE Modified Alternative (B2M), leaves the I-90 center roadway at Bellevue Way SE and continues north adjacent to Bellevue Way SE and then along 112th Avenue SE. Segment C extends between SE 6th and NE 12th Streets and transitions from the primarily suburban single-family residential and commercial area of south Bellevue to the dense, urban central business district of downtown Bellevue. Key destinations in Segment C are Bellevue's downtown core and transit center and, on the east side of I-405, the Overlake Hospital and Group Health medical centers. Segment D is located within the Bel-Red subarea of Bellevue and the Overlake neighborhood of Redmond. A potential tail track could extend past the Overlake Transit Center or within the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway corridor near the Segment C/D connection. The preferred Alternative D2A has been modified from the 2008 draft EIS by shifting the route in the 120th Station area to the north, remaining adjacent to State Route (SR) 520 north of NE 24th Street and moving the Overlake Village Station along SR 520. Segment E travels parallel to SR 520 north and east into Downtown Redmond. The preferred Alternative E2 for this segment has been modified by replacing the Town Center Station and the Transit Center Station with one Downtown Station located midway between the two original stations, adding an 800-foot-long tail track for train layover and turnback operations, and discontinuing the alignment up 161st Avenue NE. The project may be constructed in phases beginning by 2013 to 2014, with the segment to Bellevue planned for opening by 2020 and to Overlake Transit Center planned for 2021. Segment E to Downtown Redmond is planned to be constructed after 2021. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The East Link LRT system would improve the speed and reliability of the regional transportation network and expand network capacity. Diversion of commuters and other travelers from automobiles to cleaner, more efficient rail transport would reduce congestion on regional highways and roads and reduce future air pollutant emissions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Project development would require the displacement of residences and businesses, land in recreational use, including parkland, and open space, as well as historically significant structures and archaeological sites. The transit facilities would alter visual aesthetics along the chosen corridors and utilities would have to be relocated in some areas. Construction workers would encounter hazardous waste sites. With respect to the natural environment, the project would impact wetlands and other wildlife habitats. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0079D, Volume 33, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100442, Executive Summary--36 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--347 pages, November 5, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 24 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Open Space KW - Parks KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 404(b) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Washington KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130427?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-05&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.title=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 5, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EAST LINK PROJECT, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2008). AN - 839582064; 14712 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 18-mile eastern extension of light rail transit (LRT) is proposed to enhance transportation in the Central Puget Sound metropolitan region of King County, Washington. The East Link LRT Project would connect to the rail's system's initial segment in downtown Seattle and extend east to Mercer Island, Bellevue, and Redmond. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes new alternatives and design modifications and supplements the 2008 draft EIS for the project. The project corridor has been divided into five segments along distinct geographic boundaries. Alternatives considered include 24 build alternatives (one in Segment A, six in Segment B, ten in Segment C, four in Segment D, and three in Segment E), the No Build Alternative, and four maintenance facility alternatives (three in Segment D and one in Segment E). Each alternative route includes one to four stations; a total of 29 station options exist in the five segments. Segment A begins in the downtown Seattle transit Tunnel at the International District/Chinatown Station and extends eastward on Interstate 90 (I-90) across north Beacon Hill and Rainier Valley, then travels on the I-90 floating bridge across Lake Washington to Mercer Island. The 6.9-mile route remains on I-90 across Mercer Island and Lake Washington to south Bellevue. Segment B travels from the I-90 center roadway northward to approximately SE 6th Street. A new alternative in Segment B, the preferred 112th SE Modified Alternative (B2M), leaves the I-90 center roadway at Bellevue Way SE and continues north adjacent to Bellevue Way SE and then along 112th Avenue SE. Segment C extends between SE 6th and NE 12th Streets and transitions from the primarily suburban single-family residential and commercial area of south Bellevue to the dense, urban central business district of downtown Bellevue. Key destinations in Segment C are Bellevue's downtown core and transit center and, on the east side of I-405, the Overlake Hospital and Group Health medical centers. Segment D is located within the Bel-Red subarea of Bellevue and the Overlake neighborhood of Redmond. A potential tail track could extend past the Overlake Transit Center or within the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway corridor near the Segment C/D connection. The preferred Alternative D2A has been modified from the 2008 draft EIS by shifting the route in the 120th Station area to the north, remaining adjacent to State Route (SR) 520 north of NE 24th Street and moving the Overlake Village Station along SR 520. Segment E travels parallel to SR 520 north and east into Downtown Redmond. The preferred Alternative E2 for this segment has been modified by replacing the Town Center Station and the Transit Center Station with one Downtown Station located midway between the two original stations, adding an 800-foot-long tail track for train layover and turnback operations, and discontinuing the alignment up 161st Avenue NE. The project may be constructed in phases beginning by 2013 to 2014, with the segment to Bellevue planned for opening by 2020 and to Overlake Transit Center planned for 2021. Segment E to Downtown Redmond is planned to be constructed after 2021. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The East Link LRT system would improve the speed and reliability of the regional transportation network and expand network capacity. Diversion of commuters and other travelers from automobiles to cleaner, more efficient rail transport would reduce congestion on regional highways and roads and reduce future air pollutant emissions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Project development would require the displacement of residences and businesses, land in recreational use, including parkland, and open space, as well as historically significant structures and archaeological sites. The transit facilities would alter visual aesthetics along the chosen corridors and utilities would have to be relocated in some areas. Construction workers would encounter hazardous waste sites. With respect to the natural environment, the project would impact wetlands and other wildlife habitats. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0079D, Volume 33, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100442, Executive Summary--36 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--347 pages, November 5, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Open Space KW - Parks KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 404(b) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Washington KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/839582064?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-11-05&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.title=EAST+LINK+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2008%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 5, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Quantifying uplift rates along the Pacific/North American Plate boundary in the wake of the passage of the Mendocino triple junction using soil development on flights of fluvial terraces AN - 902069363; 2011-093480 AB - For the past six years, we have studied the soil development on flights of fluvial terraces in order to better understand the timing of valley development in the wake of the northward migration of the Mendocino Triple Junction in northern California. We present soils data from two areas, 1) the Cache Creek Natural Area (CCNA), east of Clear Lake in Lake County, approximately 220km SSE of the triple junction region, and 2) the Confusion Hill area along Highway 101 in Mendocino County, approximately 60km SE of the triple junction region. In the CCNA, we find from the soils data and valley geomorphology, that river incision has occurred for at least the past 200,000 + or - 100,000 years. The style of incision appears to be episodic, with incision events or episodes separated by intervals of stability and valley widening. Flights of 4-9 river terraces are preserved over a time span of perhaps 0.1 million years in the CCNA. The average rate of uplift estimated by the relative ages of river terraces based upon soil development is approximately 1 meter/ka, varying between about 0.26 m /ka to more than 1m/ka for the oldest surfaces. In the Confusion Hill area, we see the same episodic incision over approximately the same time span, but the rate of incision is significantly higher and appears to have recently accelerated. Since about 40,000 years ago, the uplift rate is as high as 4m/ka. This high rate of incision is undoubtedly due to the bulge of uplift surrounding the triple junction, a tectonic/geomorphic signature corroborated by previous researchers. In both locations we believe incision has occurred over a much longer time interval (perhaps as much as a million years), but here we only report on the time interval spanned by our soils studies. In both regions, there are older surfaces (estimated to be 10 (super 5) years in age) with soils that have well developed Bt horizons (A/Bw/Bt/Cox/Cn profiles), whereas the younger surfaces have soils with Bw horizons (A/Bw/Cox/Cn profiles. The clay percentages of the older soils are substantially greater (e.g. 46% vs 14%), and all profile development indices yield numerical values suggesting an order of magnitude difference in soil ages. In lieu of numerical ages we find the relative age estimates provided by soil chronosequences to be an excellent proxy for an understanding of geologic rates in this tectonic setting. JF - Abstracts with Programs - Geological Society of America AU - Burke, R M AU - McPherson, B C AU - Narwold, C AU - Sawyer, Heath AU - Gaines, Jeff AU - Turner, Christopher R AU - Lloyd, Christopher AU - Anonymous Y1 - 2010/11// PY - 2010 DA - November 2010 SP - 469 PB - Geological Society of America (GSA), Boulder, CO VL - 42 IS - 5 SN - 0016-7592, 0016-7592 KW - United States KW - Northeast Pacific KW - uplifts KW - terraces KW - Cenozoic KW - California KW - Confusion Hill KW - chronosequences KW - Pacific Plate KW - Mendocino fracture zone KW - horizons KW - soils KW - East Pacific KW - Quaternary KW - plate boundaries KW - Mendocino County California KW - rates KW - North American Plate KW - plate tectonics KW - North Pacific KW - upper Quaternary KW - Pacific Ocean KW - fluvial features KW - Lake County California KW - Cache Creek Natural Area KW - 24:Quaternary geology UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/902069363?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ageorefmodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Abstracts+with+Programs+-+Geological+Society+of+America&rft.atitle=Quantifying+uplift+rates+along+the+Pacific%2FNorth+American+Plate+boundary+in+the+wake+of+the+passage+of+the+Mendocino+triple+junction+using+soil+development+on+flights+of+fluvial+terraces&rft.au=Burke%2C+R+M%3BMcPherson%2C+B+C%3BNarwold%2C+C%3BSawyer%2C+Heath%3BGaines%2C+Jeff%3BTurner%2C+Christopher+R%3BLloyd%2C+Christopher%3BAnonymous&rft.aulast=Burke&rft.aufirst=R&rft.date=2010-11-01&rft.volume=42&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=469&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Abstracts+with+Programs+-+Geological+Society+of+America&rft.issn=00167592&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Conference title - Geological Society of America, 2010 annual meeting N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2012, American Geosciences Institute. Reference includes data supplied by the Geological Society of America, Boulder, CO, United States N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - PubXState - CO N1 - Last updated - 2012-06-07 N1 - CODEN - GAAPBC N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Cache Creek Natural Area; California; Cenozoic; chronosequences; Confusion Hill; East Pacific; fluvial features; horizons; Lake County California; Mendocino County California; Mendocino fracture zone; North American Plate; North Pacific; Northeast Pacific; Pacific Ocean; Pacific Plate; plate boundaries; plate tectonics; Quaternary; rates; soils; terraces; United States; uplifts; upper Quaternary ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Weaubleau impact virtual core library AN - 898201253; 2011-087007 AB - The Weaubleau structure of west-central Missouri formed during a Mid-Mississippian (latest Osagean or earliest Meramecian Series) marine impact. The structure is slightly elliptical in shape and unusual because of its eccentric inner and outer rings. The inner ring is approximately 8 km in diameter and is interpreted as the "central" uplift area. The outer ring is approximately 19 km in diameter; it constitutes the tectonic rim, within which rocks are mildly to intensively deformed. The eccentricity of the rings is interpreted as a result of low-angle impact on a heterogeneous target rock succession of carbonate and shale with varying material strengths. The structure is remarkably well preserved because subsequent Mississippian and Pennsylvanian sedimentary cover prevented deep erosion. We recognize six types of breccia associated with the impact: megabreccia block, resurge, fracture, injection, dilation, and crystalline basement facies. Shocked quartz grains have been recovered from the resurge breccia facies. The total depth of the breccia is unknown but is at least 1,800 ft (550 m), the depth to basement in a nearby borehole. Our understanding of the three-dimensional framework of the impact is somewhat limited. From 2003-2007, the Missouri Department of Transportation drilled ten cores around the Weaubleau impact structure to depths ranging from 60-320 ft (18-98 m). The drill sites were located in the central uplift and at various locations around its periphery. These cores are housed in the Missouri State University Core Lab, which was established in 2008. Cores are accessible to the meteorite impacts community for examination and limited sub-sampling for qualified scientific studies. The cores are also available to investigators, educators, and the public for viewing as a virtual core library at http://impacts.missouristate.edu. Seismic investigation and deeper core drilling will be needed to further elucidate our understanding of this unusual impact. JF - Abstracts with Programs - Geological Society of America AU - Moon, Kevin E AU - Evans, Kevin R AU - Miller, James F AU - Davis, George H AU - Anonymous Y1 - 2010/11// PY - 2010 DA - November 2010 SP - 305 PB - Geological Society of America (GSA), Boulder, CO VL - 42 IS - 5 SN - 0016-7592, 0016-7592 KW - United States KW - Mississippian KW - Middle Mississippian KW - breccia KW - impactites KW - impact features KW - west-central Missouri KW - Paleozoic KW - Missouri KW - Carboniferous KW - impact breccia KW - ring structures KW - metamorphism KW - cores KW - boreholes KW - Weaubleau Structure KW - metamorphic rocks KW - impact craters KW - drilling KW - computer networks KW - shock metamorphism KW - Internet KW - 23:Geomorphology KW - 05A:Igneous and metamorphic petrology UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/898201253?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ageorefmodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Abstracts+with+Programs+-+Geological+Society+of+America&rft.atitle=Weaubleau+impact+virtual+core+library&rft.au=Moon%2C+Kevin+E%3BEvans%2C+Kevin+R%3BMiller%2C+James+F%3BDavis%2C+George+H%3BAnonymous&rft.aulast=Moon&rft.aufirst=Kevin&rft.date=2010-11-01&rft.volume=42&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=305&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Abstracts+with+Programs+-+Geological+Society+of+America&rft.issn=00167592&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Conference title - Geological Society of America, 2010 annual meeting N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2012, American Geosciences Institute. Reference includes data supplied by the Geological Society of America, Boulder, CO, United States N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - PubXState - CO N1 - Last updated - 2012-06-07 N1 - CODEN - GAAPBC N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - boreholes; breccia; Carboniferous; computer networks; cores; drilling; impact breccia; impact craters; impact features; impactites; Internet; metamorphic rocks; metamorphism; Middle Mississippian; Mississippian; Missouri; Paleozoic; ring structures; shock metamorphism; United States; Weaubleau Structure; west-central Missouri ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Exploring passenger anxiety associated with train travel AN - 861538004; 14234168 AB - Although people are often encouraged to use public transportation, the riding experience is not always comfortable. This study uses service items to measure passenger anxieties by applying a conceptual model based on the railway passenger service chain perspective. Passenger anxieties associated with train travel are measured using a modern psychometric method, the Rasch model. This study surveys 412 train passengers. Analytical results indicate that the following service items cause passenger anxiety during trains travel: crowding, delays, accessibility to a railway station, searching for the right train on a platform, and transferring trains. Empirical results obtained using the Rasch approach can be used to derive an effective strategy to reduce train passenger anxiety. This empirical study also demonstrates that anxiety differs based on passenger sex, age, riding frequency, and trip type. This information will also prove useful for transportation planners and policy-makers when considering the special travel needs of certain groups to create a user-friendly railway travel environment that promotes public use. JF - Transportation AU - Cheng, Yung-Hsiang AD - Department of Transportation and Communication Management Science, National Cheng Kung University, No. 1, University Road, Tainan City, 701, Taiwan, ROC, yhcheng@mail.ncku.edu.tw Y1 - 2010/11// PY - 2010 DA - Nov 2010 SP - 875 EP - 896 PB - Springer-Verlag, Tiergartenstrasse 17 Heidelberg 69121 Germany VL - 37 IS - 6 SN - 0049-4488, 0049-4488 KW - Environment Abstracts KW - Travel KW - Age KW - Transportation KW - crowding KW - Railroads KW - ENA 18:Transportation UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/861538004?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aenvabstractsmodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation&rft.atitle=Exploring+passenger+anxiety+associated+with+train+travel&rft.au=Cheng%2C+Yung-Hsiang&rft.aulast=Cheng&rft.aufirst=Yung-Hsiang&rft.date=2010-11-01&rft.volume=37&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=875&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation&rft.issn=00494488&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007%2Fs11116-010-9267-z LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-01-01 N1 - Last updated - 2015-03-19 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Travel; Age; crowding; Transportation; Railroads DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11116-010-9267-z ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Resident Attitudes toward Heritage Tourism Development AN - 837449398; 2010-24387 AB - This study investigates the interrelationships between community attachment, economic dependence on tourism, perceived positive tourism impacts, perceived negative impacts and support for tourism development. A total of 239 respondents completed a survey conducted at Tainan city, a heritage city in southern Taiwan. The data were analysed using a structural equation modelling (SEM) technique; and the results reveal that both community attachment and economic dependence have significant effects on positive tourism impact and, in turn, can affect the support for tourism development. Although both impacts have significant effects on support for tourism development, the effect from the positive impact is much greater than the negative impact. Adapted from the source document. JF - Tourism Geographies AU - Chen, Ching-Fu AU - Chen, Pei-Chun AD - Department of Transportation & Communication Management Science, National Cheng Kung University, 1, University Rd, Tainan, Taiwan Y1 - 2010/11// PY - 2010 DA - November 2010 SP - 525 EP - 545 PB - Routledge/Taylor & Francis. Abingdon UK VL - 12 IS - 4 SN - 1461-6688, 1461-6688 KW - Business and service sector - Hospitality and tourism business KW - Economic conditions and policy - Economic policy, planning, and development KW - Culture and religion - Museums, memorials, monuments, and cultural property KW - Culture and religion - Intellectual life KW - Resident attitude tourism impact tourism development heritage tourism structural equation modelling Taiwan Tainan KW - Public opinion KW - Heritage tourism KW - Tourism KW - Taiwan KW - Economic development KW - article UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/837449398?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Apais&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Tourism+Geographies&rft.atitle=Resident+Attitudes+toward+Heritage+Tourism+Development&rft.au=Chen%2C+Ching-Fu%3BChen%2C+Pei-Chun&rft.aulast=Chen&rft.aufirst=Ching-Fu&rft.date=2010-11-01&rft.volume=12&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=525&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Tourism+Geographies&rft.issn=14616688&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080%2F14616688.2010.516398 LA - English DB - PAIS Index N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-10 N1 - Last updated - 2016-09-28 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Tourism; Economic development; Taiwan; Heritage tourism; Public opinion DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14616688.2010.516398 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Estimation of rear-end crash potential using vehicle trajectory data AN - 787204339; 13637718 AB - Recent advancement in traffic surveillance systems has allowed for obtaining more detailed vehicular movement such as individual vehicle trajectory data. Understanding the characteristics of interactions between leading vehicle and following in the traffic flow stream is a backbone for designing and evaluating more sophisticated traffic and vehicle control strategies. This study proposes a methodology for estimating rear-end crash potential, as a probabilistic measure, in real time based on the analysis of vehicular movements. The methodology presented in this study consists of two components. The first estimates the probability that a vehicle's trajectory belonging to either a~changing lane' or a~going straight'. A binary logistic regression (BLR) is used to model the lane-changing decision of the subject vehicle. The other component derives crash probability by an exponential decay function using time-to-collision (TTC) between the subject vehicle and the front vehicle. Also, an aggregated measure, crash risk index (CRI) is used in the analysis to accumulate rear-end crash potential for each subject vehicle. The result of this study can be used in developing traffic control and information systems, in particular, for crash prevention. JF - Accident Analysis & Prevention AU - Oh, Cheol AU - Kim, Taejin AD - Department of Transportation Systems Engineering, Hanyang University at Ansan, Sa1-dong, Sangnok-gu, Ansan-city, Kyunggi-do 426-791, Republic of Korea Y1 - 2010/11// PY - 2010 DA - November 2010 SP - 1888 EP - 1893 PB - Elsevier Science, P.O. Box 800 Kidlington Oxford OX5 1DX UK VL - 42 IS - 6 SN - 0001-4575, 0001-4575 KW - Aqualine Abstracts; Water Resources Abstracts; ASFA 2: Ocean Technology Policy & Non-Living Resources; Risk Abstracts; Health & Safety Science Abstracts KW - Rear-end crash KW - Vehicle trajectory KW - Lane-changing model KW - Time-to-collision KW - Binary logistic regression model KW - Exponential decay function KW - Information Systems KW - Streams KW - Flow rates KW - Accidents KW - prevention KW - River Flow KW - Decay KW - traffic safety KW - Estimating KW - Surveillance and enforcement KW - Vehicles KW - Model Studies KW - Risk KW - traffic KW - Stream KW - Information systems KW - Q2 09243:Structure, mechanics and thermodynamics KW - SW 5010:Network design KW - AQ 00003:Monitoring and Analysis of Water and Wastes KW - H 0500:General KW - R2 23010:General: Models, forecasting UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/787204339?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aaqualine&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Accident+Analysis+%26+Prevention&rft.atitle=Estimation+of+rear-end+crash+potential+using+vehicle+trajectory+data&rft.au=Oh%2C+Cheol%3BKim%2C+Taejin&rft.aulast=Oh&rft.aufirst=Cheol&rft.date=2010-11-01&rft.volume=42&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=1888&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Accident+Analysis+%26+Prevention&rft.issn=00014575&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016%2Fj.aap.2010.05.009 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - Last updated - 2016-02-04 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Accidents; Stream; Vehicles; Surveillance and enforcement; Information systems; traffic; prevention; Decay; Flow rates; traffic safety; Risk; Information Systems; Estimating; River Flow; Streams; Model Studies DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2010.05.009 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - The effect of safety climate on seafarers' safety behaviors in container shipping AN - 787202509; 13637704 AB - This study empirically examined safety climate and its effects on safety behaviors from seafarers' perceptions in the container shipping context. Research hypotheses were formulated and tested using survey data collected from 608 seafarers working on 124 vessels belonging to 13 of the top 20 global container carriers. A structural equation model was used to examine the effect of safety climate dimensions, namely, safety policy, perceived supervisor safety behavior, and safety management, on safety behavior. The results revealed a positive association between safety climate and seafarers' safety behavior. The contribution of the study findings to the development of safety climate theory and their managerial implications for vessel safety in shipping operations are discussed. JF - Accident Analysis & Prevention AU - Lu, Chin-Shan AU - Tsai, Chaur-Luh AD - Department of Transportation and Communication Management Science, National Cheng Kung University, No. 1, University Road, Tainan City 701, Taiwan, ROC Y1 - 2010/11// PY - 2010 DA - Nov 2010 SP - 1999 EP - 2006 PB - Elsevier Science, P.O. Box 800 Kidlington Oxford OX5 1DX UK VL - 42 IS - 6 SN - 0001-4575, 0001-4575 KW - Health & Safety Science Abstracts KW - Safety climate KW - Safety behavior KW - Container shipping KW - Seafarer KW - Containers KW - Accidents KW - Behavior KW - Perception KW - prevention KW - H 0500:General UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/787202509?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ahealthsafetyabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Accident+Analysis+%26+Prevention&rft.atitle=The+effect+of+safety+climate+on+seafarers%27+safety+behaviors+in+container+shipping&rft.au=Lu%2C+Chin-Shan%3BTsai%2C+Chaur-Luh&rft.aulast=Lu&rft.aufirst=Chin-Shan&rft.date=2010-11-01&rft.volume=42&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=1999&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Accident+Analysis+%26+Prevention&rft.issn=00014575&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016%2Fj.aap.2010.06.008 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - Last updated - 2015-03-19 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Containers; Accidents; Behavior; Perception; prevention DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2010.06.008 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Small area estimates of daily person-miles of travel: 2001 National Household Transportation Survey AN - 786969660; 4128743 AB - The National Household Transportation Survey (NHTS) was designed at the national level, and for most states it does not have a large enough sample to produce reliable estimates, especially for subdomains (e.g., age groups) within a state. Using the 2001 NHTS, we produced small area estimates (SAEs) of the percentage of persons among four age groups (17 or younger, 18-39, 40-54, and 55 or older) having high daily person-miles of travel (more than 87.5 miles a day, which is the 90th percentile for daily person-miles traveled) and associated prediction intervals for all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The survey weighted hierarchical Bayes (Folsom et al., Proc of the Sect on Surv Res Methods of the Am Stat Assoc 371-375, 1999) small area estimation (SAE) methodology was used to produce state-level SAEs. This paper describes the methodology and shows that SAE can be an effective technique for producing reliable state-level estimates from large, national surveys like the NHTS. In particular, the prediction interval relative widths for SAEs were, on average, 31-48% narrower than the corresponding design-based confidence interval widths, whereas for small states the reduction was around 47-63%. Reprinted by permission of Springer JF - Transportation AU - Vaish, Akhil K AU - Chen, Shijie AU - Sathe, Neeraja S AU - Folsom, Ralph E AU - Chandhok, Promod AU - Guo, Kuo AD - RTI International ; US Department of Transportation Y1 - 2010/11// PY - 2010 DA - Nov 2010 SP - 825 EP - 848 VL - 37 IS - 6 SN - 0049-4488, 0049-4488 KW - Economics KW - Travel KW - Measurement KW - Transport KW - Households KW - Surveys KW - Age groups KW - Estimation KW - U.S.A. KW - Bayesian method UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/786969660?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aibss&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation&rft.atitle=Small+area+estimates+of+daily+person-miles+of+travel%3A+2001+National+Household+Transportation+Survey&rft.au=Vaish%2C+Akhil+K%3BChen%2C+Shijie%3BSathe%2C+Neeraja+S%3BFolsom%2C+Ralph+E%3BChandhok%2C+Promod%3BGuo%2C+Kuo&rft.aulast=Vaish&rft.aufirst=Akhil&rft.date=2010-11-01&rft.volume=37&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=825&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation&rft.issn=00494488&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007%2Fs11116-010-9279-8 LA - English DB - International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS) N1 - Date revised - 2013-06-12 N1 - Last updated - 2013-09-16 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - 6040 5676; 12429; 12952 7336 3198; 7854; 12937; 4403 7854; 652 5676 646 6091; 1512 3865 4025; 433 293 14 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11116-010-9279-8 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Potential risk of using General Estimates System: Bicycle safety AN - 759315057; 13637736 AB - Beneficial effects of bicycle helmet use have been reported mostly based on medical or survey data collected from hospitals. This study was to examine the validity of the United States General Estimates System (GES) database familiar to many transportation professionals for a beneficial effect of helmet use in reducing the severity of injury to bicyclists and found potential risk of erroneous conclusions that can be drawn by a narrowly focused study when the GES database is used. Although the focus of the study was on bicycle helmet use, its findings regarding potential risk might be true for any type of traffic safety study using the GES data. A partial proportional odds model reflecting intrinsic ordering of injury severity was mainly used. About 16,000 bicycle-involved traffic crash records occurring in 2003 through 2008 in the United States were extracted from the GES database. Using the 2003-2008 GES data, a beneficial effect of helmet use was found in 2007, yet a detrimental effect in 2004 and no effect in 2003, 2005, 2006, and 2008, which are contrary to the past findings from medical or hospital survey data. It was speculated that these mixed results might be attributable to a possible lack of representation of the GES data for bicycle-involved traffic crashes, which may be supported by the findings, such as the average helmet use rates at the time of the crashes varying from 12% in 2004 to 38% in 2008. This suggests that the GES data may not be a reliable source for studying narrowly focused issues such as the effect of helmet use. A considerable fluctuation over years in basic statistical values (e.g., average) of variables of interest (e.g., helmet use) may be an indication of a possible lack of representation of the GES data. In such a case, caution should be exercised in interpreting and generalizing analysis results. JF - Accident Analysis & Prevention AU - Kweon, Young-Jun AU - Lee, Joyoung AD - Virginia Transportation Research Council, Virginia Department of Transportation, 530 Edgemont Road, Charlottesville, VA 22903, United States Y1 - 2010/11// PY - 2010 DA - Nov 2010 SP - 1712 EP - 1717 PB - Elsevier Science, P.O. Box 800 Kidlington Oxford OX5 1DX UK VL - 42 IS - 6 SN - 0001-4575, 0001-4575 KW - Risk Abstracts; Health & Safety Science Abstracts KW - General Estimates System (GES) KW - Bicycle helmet KW - Traffic safety KW - Partial proportional odds model KW - Risk assessment KW - bicycles KW - USA KW - Accidents KW - Transportation KW - Injuries KW - Accident prevention KW - helmets KW - traffic safety KW - Hospitals KW - H 2000:Transportation KW - R2 23010:General: Models, forecasting UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/759315057?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ariskabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Accident+Analysis+%26+Prevention&rft.atitle=Potential+risk+of+using+General+Estimates+System%3A+Bicycle+safety&rft.au=Kweon%2C+Young-Jun%3BLee%2C+Joyoung&rft.aulast=Kweon&rft.aufirst=Young-Jun&rft.date=2010-11-01&rft.volume=42&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=1712&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Accident+Analysis+%26+Prevention&rft.issn=00014575&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016%2Fj.aap.2010.04.011 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - Last updated - 2015-03-19 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Risk assessment; bicycles; Accidents; Transportation; Injuries; Accident prevention; helmets; traffic safety; Hospitals; USA DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2010.04.011 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - A multivariate causality test of carbon dioxide emissions, energy consumption and economic growth in China AN - 1777098983; 13402146 AB - This paper uses multivariate co-integration Granger causality tests to investigate the correlations between carbon dioxide emissions, energy consumption and economic growth in China. Some researchers have argued that the adoption of a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions and energy consumption as a long term policy goal will result in a closed-form relationship, to the detriment of the economy. Therefore, a perspective that can make allowances for the fact that the exclusive pursuit of economic growth will increase energy consumption and CO sub(2) emissions is required; to the extent that such growth will have adverse effects with regard to global climate change. JF - Applied Energy AU - Chang, Ching-Chih AD - Department of Transportation & Communication Management Science, National Cheng Kung University, No. 1, University Road, Tainan 70101, Taiwan chan5305@mail.ncku.edu.tw Y1 - 2010/11// PY - 2010 DA - November 2010 SP - 3533 EP - 3537 PB - Elsevier Science, The Boulevard Kidlington Oxford OX5 1GB UK VL - 87 IS - 11 SN - 0306-2619, 0306-2619 KW - Materials Business File (MB); Environmental Engineering Abstracts (EN) KW - Multivariate co-integration KW - Carbon dioxide emissions KW - Energy consumption KW - Economic growth KW - Economics KW - Climate change KW - Allowances KW - Exact solutions KW - Carbon dioxide KW - Emission analysis KW - Mathematical analysis UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1777098983?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aenvironmentalengabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Applied+Energy&rft.atitle=A+multivariate+causality+test+of+carbon+dioxide+emissions%2C+energy+consumption+and+economic+growth+in+China&rft.au=Chang%2C+Ching-Chih&rft.aulast=Chang&rft.aufirst=Ching-Chih&rft.date=2010-11-01&rft.volume=87&rft.issue=11&rft.spage=3533&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Applied+Energy&rft.issn=03062619&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016%2Fj.apenergy.2010.05.004 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2013-01-01 N1 - Last updated - 2016-06-30 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2010.05.004 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25/PASEO DEL NORTE INTERCHANGE, ALBUQUERQUE, BERNALILLO COUNTY, NEW MEXICO. [Part 1 of 1] T2 - I-25/PASEO DEL NORTE INTERCHANGE, ALBUQUERQUE, BERNALILLO COUNTY, NEW MEXICO. AN - 873131843; 14707-7_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction of the Interstate 25 (I-25)/Paseo del Norte interchange and adjacent segments of I-25 and Paseo del Norte in Albuquerque, New Mexico is proposed. The interchange is the crossroads of two regionally significant, high-capacity transportation facilities that serve the Albuquerque metropolitan area. I-25 is the primary north-south route and, as such, is essential to regional mobility within and through the metro area. Additionally, I-25 is part of the national highway system and also serves broader intra-state and inter-state travel needs. Paseo del Norte is a major east-west transportation thoroughfare in the northern portion of the Albuquerque urban area and is also part of the national highway system. Analyses of existing traffic operations demonstrate the need for improvements in that a substantial portion of the I-25 corridor currently operates under moderate to severe congestion. Congestion during the morning and evening peak traffic hours is widespread and affects the I-25 mainline, the Paseo del Norte mainline, and several of the ramp roadways within the project area. Six of the eight locations where ramps intersect with arterial cross streets within the project area and both of the intersections of Paseo del Norte and arterial cross streets (Jefferson Street and San Pedro Drive) are also severely congested. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this draft EIS. Under Alternative 7, improvements to I-25 would extend from the Jefferson Street Interchange north to the Alameda Boulevard Interchange. The improvements to Paseo del Norte would extend from just east of the Second Street Interchange to Louisiana Boulevard. The key feature of this alternative is the proposed use of an echelon configuration in the core of the interchange at I-25 and Paseo del Norte. The echelon configuration is similar to a standard diamond interchange except that it separates opposing lanes by placing them at different levels resulting in a three-level interchange. The I-25 lanes would be on the bottom level and the westbound lanes of Paseo del Norte would be one level above the eastbound lanes. This vertical separation would eliminate conflicts between left-turning traffic and opposite direction through traffic. The extent of improvements under Alternative 16 would be the same as for Alternative 7, but a system interchange configuration would be used in the core of the interchange. The system configuration uses free-flow ramps to serve major traffic movements and thereby eliminates stops at traffic signals within the interchange core for the major movements. The free-flow ramps would accommodate specific movements by directly separating conflicts between opposing traffic movements. Local traffic would still be required to use intersections controlled by traffic signals. Construction, right-of-way acquisition, and other project costs of implementing Alternative 7 and Alternative 16, are estimated at approximately $358 million and $360 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements to the interchange and adjacent segments would reduce congestion and improve safety on the interstate system, frontage roads, and associated arterial street intersections within the project area. Access to employment and other destinations served by the frontage roads and arterial streets would be enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of either of the build alternatives would require the acquisition of 47 to 53 acres of private property and several structures, including residences and a community well, for highway right-of-way. Under Alternative 16, the acquisition of up to 19 mobile homes within Coronado Mobile Home Park would also be required. With either alternative, the well and associated structures would be relocated, or the mobile home park could be connected to the Albuquerque municipal water supply system. Increased traffic noise resulting from changes to the alignment of major roadways would affect two mobile home parks, a hotel, and several office buildings and other developments. Analysis of noise barriers indicates that walls would be an effective noise abatement strategy for the impacted residential properties. Construction workers would encounter up to 147 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100437, 336 pages and maps, October 29, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NM-EIS-10-01-D KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Mobile Homes KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Transportation KW - New Mexico KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131843?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25%2FPASEO+DEL+NORTE+INTERCHANGE%2C+ALBUQUERQUE%2C+BERNALILLO+COUNTY%2C+NEW+MEXICO.&rft.title=I-25%2FPASEO+DEL+NORTE+INTERCHANGE%2C+ALBUQUERQUE%2C+BERNALILLO+COUNTY%2C+NEW+MEXICO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Santa Fe, New Mexico; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 29, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25/PASEO DEL NORTE INTERCHANGE, ALBUQUERQUE, BERNALILLO COUNTY, NEW MEXICO. AN - 818791644; 14707 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction of the Interstate 25 (I-25)/Paseo del Norte interchange and adjacent segments of I-25 and Paseo del Norte in Albuquerque, New Mexico is proposed. The interchange is the crossroads of two regionally significant, high-capacity transportation facilities that serve the Albuquerque metropolitan area. I-25 is the primary north-south route and, as such, is essential to regional mobility within and through the metro area. Additionally, I-25 is part of the national highway system and also serves broader intra-state and inter-state travel needs. Paseo del Norte is a major east-west transportation thoroughfare in the northern portion of the Albuquerque urban area and is also part of the national highway system. Analyses of existing traffic operations demonstrate the need for improvements in that a substantial portion of the I-25 corridor currently operates under moderate to severe congestion. Congestion during the morning and evening peak traffic hours is widespread and affects the I-25 mainline, the Paseo del Norte mainline, and several of the ramp roadways within the project area. Six of the eight locations where ramps intersect with arterial cross streets within the project area and both of the intersections of Paseo del Norte and arterial cross streets (Jefferson Street and San Pedro Drive) are also severely congested. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this draft EIS. Under Alternative 7, improvements to I-25 would extend from the Jefferson Street Interchange north to the Alameda Boulevard Interchange. The improvements to Paseo del Norte would extend from just east of the Second Street Interchange to Louisiana Boulevard. The key feature of this alternative is the proposed use of an echelon configuration in the core of the interchange at I-25 and Paseo del Norte. The echelon configuration is similar to a standard diamond interchange except that it separates opposing lanes by placing them at different levels resulting in a three-level interchange. The I-25 lanes would be on the bottom level and the westbound lanes of Paseo del Norte would be one level above the eastbound lanes. This vertical separation would eliminate conflicts between left-turning traffic and opposite direction through traffic. The extent of improvements under Alternative 16 would be the same as for Alternative 7, but a system interchange configuration would be used in the core of the interchange. The system configuration uses free-flow ramps to serve major traffic movements and thereby eliminates stops at traffic signals within the interchange core for the major movements. The free-flow ramps would accommodate specific movements by directly separating conflicts between opposing traffic movements. Local traffic would still be required to use intersections controlled by traffic signals. Construction, right-of-way acquisition, and other project costs of implementing Alternative 7 and Alternative 16, are estimated at approximately $358 million and $360 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements to the interchange and adjacent segments would reduce congestion and improve safety on the interstate system, frontage roads, and associated arterial street intersections within the project area. Access to employment and other destinations served by the frontage roads and arterial streets would be enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of either of the build alternatives would require the acquisition of 47 to 53 acres of private property and several structures, including residences and a community well, for highway right-of-way. Under Alternative 16, the acquisition of up to 19 mobile homes within Coronado Mobile Home Park would also be required. With either alternative, the well and associated structures would be relocated, or the mobile home park could be connected to the Albuquerque municipal water supply system. Increased traffic noise resulting from changes to the alignment of major roadways would affect two mobile home parks, a hotel, and several office buildings and other developments. Analysis of noise barriers indicates that walls would be an effective noise abatement strategy for the impacted residential properties. Construction workers would encounter up to 147 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100437, 336 pages and maps, October 29, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NM-EIS-10-01-D KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Mobile Homes KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Transportation KW - New Mexico KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/818791644?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25%2FPASEO+DEL+NORTE+INTERCHANGE%2C+ALBUQUERQUE%2C+BERNALILLO+COUNTY%2C+NEW+MEXICO.&rft.title=I-25%2FPASEO+DEL+NORTE+INTERCHANGE%2C+ALBUQUERQUE%2C+BERNALILLO+COUNTY%2C+NEW+MEXICO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Santa Fe, New Mexico; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 29, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MEDIUM - AND HEAVY - DUTY FUEL EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. [Part 2 of 3] T2 - MEDIUM - AND HEAVY - DUTY FUEL EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. AN - 877072286; 14699-9_0002 AB - PURPOSE: A fuel efficiency improvement program for the total fleet of commercial medium- and heavy-duty motor vehicles built in model years (MYs) 2014-2018 is proposed. The transportation sector is the second largest consumer of energy in the United States and represents 28 percent of total energy use. Under the proposed action, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) would set coordinated and harmonized fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions standards for commercial on-highway vehicles and work trucks, referred to collectively as HD vehicles. NHTSA is proposing that mandatory standards begin in MY 2016 and that the standards remain stable for three model years. NHTSA also proposes optional voluntary compliance standards for MYs 2014-2015 prior to mandatory regulation in MY 2016. HD vehicles are categorized by gross vehicle weight and include pickup trucks and vans (Class 2b and Class 3), vocational vehicles (Classes 2b through 8), and combination tractors (Class 7 and Class 8). Ten alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative 1), are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under Alternative 2, NHTSA would regulate HD engines rather than the vehicle as a whole. This approach would be similar to the way EPA currently regulates heavy-duty engines to control criteria emissions. Alternative 3 would set performance standards for engines used in Class 8 combination tractors and standards for the overall vehicle efficiency performance for Class 8 tractors. Alternative 4 combines Alternative 2 with Alternative 3, and additionally would set an overall vehicle efficiency performance standard for Class 7 tractors. Alternative 5 would add an overall vehicle efficiency performance standard for HD pickups and vans. Therefore, Alternative 5 combines the standards for all engines used in Classes 2 through 8 vehicles, and the overall fuel consumption standards for Classes 7 and 8 tractors, and would also set overall fuel consumption standards for HD pickup and vans. Alternative 6, which is the preferred alternative, would set overall fuel consumption standards for all Classes 2b through 8 vehicles and all engines used in those vehicles. It combines the standards for engines used in Classes 2b through 8 vehicles (except engines in HD pickups and vans, which are regulated as complete vehicles), the overall fuel consumption standards for Classes 7 and 8 tractors, the fuel consumption standards for HD pickups and vans by work factor, and also sets overall vehicle fuel consumption standards for Classes 2b8 vocational vehicles (in gallons/1,000 ton-miles). The fuel consumption standards for vocational vehicles vary by vehicle class. This alternative sets fuel consumption standards for both the engines and the vehicles in the entire HD vehicle sector. Compliance for HD pickups and vans would be determined through a fleet averaging process. Alternatives 6A and 6B would implement stringency levels which are 15 percent less stringent and 20 percent more stringent, respectively. Alternative 7 would add a performance standard for the commercial trailers pulled by tractors. Under Alternative 8, more stringent standards for all vehicle categories would apply based on accelerated adoption of hybrid powertrains for HD pickup and vans and vocational vehicles. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed rules would address the urgent challenges of energy independence and security and global warming by achieving substantial improvements in fuel economy and reductions of greenhouse gas emissions from the medium- and heavy-duty vehicle part of the transportation sector, based on existing technologies. Energy consumption would decrease under all the action alternatives compared to the No Action Alternative. For the preferred alternative, the fuel savings over the No Action Alternative in 2050 would be 8.94 billion gallons for the HD vehicle fleet. Emissions of carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, and volatile organic compounds would be reduced. Consistent, harmonized, and streamlined requirements would deliver environmental and energy benefits, cost savings, and administrative efficiencies on a nationwide basis. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Vehicle manufacturers, may need to commit additional resources to existing, redeveloped, or new production facilities to meet the standards. Under all alternatives, total energy consumption and carbon dioxide emissions by HD vehicles are projected to continue to increase as a result of continued economic and population growth. LEGAL MANDATES: Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.), Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, and Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (49 U.S.C. 32091 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100429, Summary--24 pages, Draft EIS--462 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 25, 2025 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Energy KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Air Quality Standards KW - Carbon Dioxide KW - Climatologic Assessments KW - Emissions KW - Emission Standards KW - Energy Consumption KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Regulations KW - United States of America KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975, Project Authorization KW - Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/877072286?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MEDIUM+-+AND+HEAVY+-+DUTY+FUEL+EFFICIENCY+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM.&rft.title=MEDIUM+-+AND+HEAVY+-+DUTY+FUEL+EFFICIENCY+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 25, 2025 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MEDIUM - AND HEAVY - DUTY FUEL EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. [Part 1 of 3] T2 - MEDIUM - AND HEAVY - DUTY FUEL EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. AN - 877072285; 14699-9_0001 AB - PURPOSE: A fuel efficiency improvement program for the total fleet of commercial medium- and heavy-duty motor vehicles built in model years (MYs) 2014-2018 is proposed. The transportation sector is the second largest consumer of energy in the United States and represents 28 percent of total energy use. Under the proposed action, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) would set coordinated and harmonized fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions standards for commercial on-highway vehicles and work trucks, referred to collectively as HD vehicles. NHTSA is proposing that mandatory standards begin in MY 2016 and that the standards remain stable for three model years. NHTSA also proposes optional voluntary compliance standards for MYs 2014-2015 prior to mandatory regulation in MY 2016. HD vehicles are categorized by gross vehicle weight and include pickup trucks and vans (Class 2b and Class 3), vocational vehicles (Classes 2b through 8), and combination tractors (Class 7 and Class 8). Ten alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative 1), are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under Alternative 2, NHTSA would regulate HD engines rather than the vehicle as a whole. This approach would be similar to the way EPA currently regulates heavy-duty engines to control criteria emissions. Alternative 3 would set performance standards for engines used in Class 8 combination tractors and standards for the overall vehicle efficiency performance for Class 8 tractors. Alternative 4 combines Alternative 2 with Alternative 3, and additionally would set an overall vehicle efficiency performance standard for Class 7 tractors. Alternative 5 would add an overall vehicle efficiency performance standard for HD pickups and vans. Therefore, Alternative 5 combines the standards for all engines used in Classes 2 through 8 vehicles, and the overall fuel consumption standards for Classes 7 and 8 tractors, and would also set overall fuel consumption standards for HD pickup and vans. Alternative 6, which is the preferred alternative, would set overall fuel consumption standards for all Classes 2b through 8 vehicles and all engines used in those vehicles. It combines the standards for engines used in Classes 2b through 8 vehicles (except engines in HD pickups and vans, which are regulated as complete vehicles), the overall fuel consumption standards for Classes 7 and 8 tractors, the fuel consumption standards for HD pickups and vans by work factor, and also sets overall vehicle fuel consumption standards for Classes 2b8 vocational vehicles (in gallons/1,000 ton-miles). The fuel consumption standards for vocational vehicles vary by vehicle class. This alternative sets fuel consumption standards for both the engines and the vehicles in the entire HD vehicle sector. Compliance for HD pickups and vans would be determined through a fleet averaging process. Alternatives 6A and 6B would implement stringency levels which are 15 percent less stringent and 20 percent more stringent, respectively. Alternative 7 would add a performance standard for the commercial trailers pulled by tractors. Under Alternative 8, more stringent standards for all vehicle categories would apply based on accelerated adoption of hybrid powertrains for HD pickup and vans and vocational vehicles. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed rules would address the urgent challenges of energy independence and security and global warming by achieving substantial improvements in fuel economy and reductions of greenhouse gas emissions from the medium- and heavy-duty vehicle part of the transportation sector, based on existing technologies. Energy consumption would decrease under all the action alternatives compared to the No Action Alternative. For the preferred alternative, the fuel savings over the No Action Alternative in 2050 would be 8.94 billion gallons for the HD vehicle fleet. Emissions of carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, and volatile organic compounds would be reduced. Consistent, harmonized, and streamlined requirements would deliver environmental and energy benefits, cost savings, and administrative efficiencies on a nationwide basis. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Vehicle manufacturers, may need to commit additional resources to existing, redeveloped, or new production facilities to meet the standards. Under all alternatives, total energy consumption and carbon dioxide emissions by HD vehicles are projected to continue to increase as a result of continued economic and population growth. LEGAL MANDATES: Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.), Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, and Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (49 U.S.C. 32091 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100429, Summary--24 pages, Draft EIS--462 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 25, 2025 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Energy KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Air Quality Standards KW - Carbon Dioxide KW - Climatologic Assessments KW - Emissions KW - Emission Standards KW - Energy Consumption KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Regulations KW - United States of America KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975, Project Authorization KW - Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/877072285?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MEDIUM+-+AND+HEAVY+-+DUTY+FUEL+EFFICIENCY+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM.&rft.title=MEDIUM+-+AND+HEAVY+-+DUTY+FUEL+EFFICIENCY+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 25, 2025 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MEDIUM - AND HEAVY - DUTY FUEL EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. [Part 3 of 3] T2 - MEDIUM - AND HEAVY - DUTY FUEL EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. AN - 877072284; 14699-9_0003 AB - PURPOSE: A fuel efficiency improvement program for the total fleet of commercial medium- and heavy-duty motor vehicles built in model years (MYs) 2014-2018 is proposed. The transportation sector is the second largest consumer of energy in the United States and represents 28 percent of total energy use. Under the proposed action, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) would set coordinated and harmonized fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions standards for commercial on-highway vehicles and work trucks, referred to collectively as HD vehicles. NHTSA is proposing that mandatory standards begin in MY 2016 and that the standards remain stable for three model years. NHTSA also proposes optional voluntary compliance standards for MYs 2014-2015 prior to mandatory regulation in MY 2016. HD vehicles are categorized by gross vehicle weight and include pickup trucks and vans (Class 2b and Class 3), vocational vehicles (Classes 2b through 8), and combination tractors (Class 7 and Class 8). Ten alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative 1), are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under Alternative 2, NHTSA would regulate HD engines rather than the vehicle as a whole. This approach would be similar to the way EPA currently regulates heavy-duty engines to control criteria emissions. Alternative 3 would set performance standards for engines used in Class 8 combination tractors and standards for the overall vehicle efficiency performance for Class 8 tractors. Alternative 4 combines Alternative 2 with Alternative 3, and additionally would set an overall vehicle efficiency performance standard for Class 7 tractors. Alternative 5 would add an overall vehicle efficiency performance standard for HD pickups and vans. Therefore, Alternative 5 combines the standards for all engines used in Classes 2 through 8 vehicles, and the overall fuel consumption standards for Classes 7 and 8 tractors, and would also set overall fuel consumption standards for HD pickup and vans. Alternative 6, which is the preferred alternative, would set overall fuel consumption standards for all Classes 2b through 8 vehicles and all engines used in those vehicles. It combines the standards for engines used in Classes 2b through 8 vehicles (except engines in HD pickups and vans, which are regulated as complete vehicles), the overall fuel consumption standards for Classes 7 and 8 tractors, the fuel consumption standards for HD pickups and vans by work factor, and also sets overall vehicle fuel consumption standards for Classes 2b8 vocational vehicles (in gallons/1,000 ton-miles). The fuel consumption standards for vocational vehicles vary by vehicle class. This alternative sets fuel consumption standards for both the engines and the vehicles in the entire HD vehicle sector. Compliance for HD pickups and vans would be determined through a fleet averaging process. Alternatives 6A and 6B would implement stringency levels which are 15 percent less stringent and 20 percent more stringent, respectively. Alternative 7 would add a performance standard for the commercial trailers pulled by tractors. Under Alternative 8, more stringent standards for all vehicle categories would apply based on accelerated adoption of hybrid powertrains for HD pickup and vans and vocational vehicles. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed rules would address the urgent challenges of energy independence and security and global warming by achieving substantial improvements in fuel economy and reductions of greenhouse gas emissions from the medium- and heavy-duty vehicle part of the transportation sector, based on existing technologies. Energy consumption would decrease under all the action alternatives compared to the No Action Alternative. For the preferred alternative, the fuel savings over the No Action Alternative in 2050 would be 8.94 billion gallons for the HD vehicle fleet. Emissions of carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, and volatile organic compounds would be reduced. Consistent, harmonized, and streamlined requirements would deliver environmental and energy benefits, cost savings, and administrative efficiencies on a nationwide basis. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Vehicle manufacturers, may need to commit additional resources to existing, redeveloped, or new production facilities to meet the standards. Under all alternatives, total energy consumption and carbon dioxide emissions by HD vehicles are projected to continue to increase as a result of continued economic and population growth. LEGAL MANDATES: Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.), Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, and Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (49 U.S.C. 32091 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100429, Summary--24 pages, Draft EIS--462 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 25, 2025 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Energy KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Air Quality Standards KW - Carbon Dioxide KW - Climatologic Assessments KW - Emissions KW - Emission Standards KW - Energy Consumption KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Regulations KW - United States of America KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975, Project Authorization KW - Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/877072284?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MEDIUM+-+AND+HEAVY+-+DUTY+FUEL+EFFICIENCY+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM.&rft.title=MEDIUM+-+AND+HEAVY+-+DUTY+FUEL+EFFICIENCY+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 25, 2025 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MEDIUM - AND HEAVY - DUTY FUEL EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. AN - 820821014; 14699 AB - PURPOSE: A fuel efficiency improvement program for the total fleet of commercial medium- and heavy-duty motor vehicles built in model years (MYs) 2014-2018 is proposed. The transportation sector is the second largest consumer of energy in the United States and represents 28 percent of total energy use. Under the proposed action, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) would set coordinated and harmonized fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions standards for commercial on-highway vehicles and work trucks, referred to collectively as HD vehicles. NHTSA is proposing that mandatory standards begin in MY 2016 and that the standards remain stable for three model years. NHTSA also proposes optional voluntary compliance standards for MYs 2014-2015 prior to mandatory regulation in MY 2016. HD vehicles are categorized by gross vehicle weight and include pickup trucks and vans (Class 2b and Class 3), vocational vehicles (Classes 2b through 8), and combination tractors (Class 7 and Class 8). Ten alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative 1), are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under Alternative 2, NHTSA would regulate HD engines rather than the vehicle as a whole. This approach would be similar to the way EPA currently regulates heavy-duty engines to control criteria emissions. Alternative 3 would set performance standards for engines used in Class 8 combination tractors and standards for the overall vehicle efficiency performance for Class 8 tractors. Alternative 4 combines Alternative 2 with Alternative 3, and additionally would set an overall vehicle efficiency performance standard for Class 7 tractors. Alternative 5 would add an overall vehicle efficiency performance standard for HD pickups and vans. Therefore, Alternative 5 combines the standards for all engines used in Classes 2 through 8 vehicles, and the overall fuel consumption standards for Classes 7 and 8 tractors, and would also set overall fuel consumption standards for HD pickup and vans. Alternative 6, which is the preferred alternative, would set overall fuel consumption standards for all Classes 2b through 8 vehicles and all engines used in those vehicles. It combines the standards for engines used in Classes 2b through 8 vehicles (except engines in HD pickups and vans, which are regulated as complete vehicles), the overall fuel consumption standards for Classes 7 and 8 tractors, the fuel consumption standards for HD pickups and vans by work factor, and also sets overall vehicle fuel consumption standards for Classes 2b8 vocational vehicles (in gallons/1,000 ton-miles). The fuel consumption standards for vocational vehicles vary by vehicle class. This alternative sets fuel consumption standards for both the engines and the vehicles in the entire HD vehicle sector. Compliance for HD pickups and vans would be determined through a fleet averaging process. Alternatives 6A and 6B would implement stringency levels which are 15 percent less stringent and 20 percent more stringent, respectively. Alternative 7 would add a performance standard for the commercial trailers pulled by tractors. Under Alternative 8, more stringent standards for all vehicle categories would apply based on accelerated adoption of hybrid powertrains for HD pickup and vans and vocational vehicles. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed rules would address the urgent challenges of energy independence and security and global warming by achieving substantial improvements in fuel economy and reductions of greenhouse gas emissions from the medium- and heavy-duty vehicle part of the transportation sector, based on existing technologies. Energy consumption would decrease under all the action alternatives compared to the No Action Alternative. For the preferred alternative, the fuel savings over the No Action Alternative in 2050 would be 8.94 billion gallons for the HD vehicle fleet. Emissions of carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, and volatile organic compounds would be reduced. Consistent, harmonized, and streamlined requirements would deliver environmental and energy benefits, cost savings, and administrative efficiencies on a nationwide basis. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Vehicle manufacturers, may need to commit additional resources to existing, redeveloped, or new production facilities to meet the standards. Under all alternatives, total energy consumption and carbon dioxide emissions by HD vehicles are projected to continue to increase as a result of continued economic and population growth. LEGAL MANDATES: Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.), Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, and Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (49 U.S.C. 32091 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100429, Summary--24 pages, Draft EIS--462 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 25, 2025 PY - 2010 KW - Energy KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Air Quality Standards KW - Carbon Dioxide KW - Climatologic Assessments KW - Emissions KW - Emission Standards KW - Energy Consumption KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Regulations KW - United States of America KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975, Project Authorization KW - Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/820821014?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MEDIUM+-+AND+HEAVY+-+DUTY+FUEL+EFFICIENCY+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM.&rft.title=MEDIUM+-+AND+HEAVY+-+DUTY+FUEL+EFFICIENCY+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 25, 2025 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). [Part 29 of 34] T2 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). AN - 873133989; 14698-8_0029 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Alaskan Way Viaduct (State Route 99) between S. Royal Brougham Way and Roy Street in downtown Seattle, King County, Washington is proposed. Damage sustained by the viaduct during the February 2001Nisqually earthquake compromised its structural integrity. This past damage, along with the age, design, and location of the existing viaduct, makes it vulnerable to future strong earthquakes, and damage from these quakes could make the structure unusable. State Route 99 (SR 99) and Interstate 5 are the primary north-south limited access routes through downtown Seattle. Failure of the viaduct would create severe hardship for the city and the region, and could result in injury or death. The March 2004 draft EIS analyzed five build alternatives and a No Build Alternative. After further study and public input, the number of build alternatives was reduced to two, the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel and Elevated Structure alternatives, which were evaluated in the 2006 supplemental draft EIS. A new Bored Tunnel Alternative was proposed in 2009 along with complementary improvements including a restored seawall; a new waterfront surface street and connection from the waterfront to Western and Elliott Avenues; a waterfront promenade; transit enhancements; and a streetcar on First Avenue. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes the Bored Tunnel Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, and compares it to the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel, Elevated Structure, and No Build alternatives. The Bored Tunnel Alternative would replace SR 99 with a tunnel that would have two lanes in each direction. Southbound lanes would be located on the top portion of the tunnel, and the northbound lanes would be located on the bottom. Travel lanes would be 11 feet wide, with a two-foot-wide shoulder on one side and a six-foot-wide shoulder on the other side. Access to and from SR 99 would be provided via ramp connections at the south portal north of S. Royal Brougham Way and the north portal near Harrison and Republican Streets. Unlike the existing connections, ramps to and from Columbia and Seneca Streets or Elliott and Western Avenues would not be provided. This alternative would remove the viaduct along the Seattle waterfront and would close and fill the Battery Street Tunnel after the bored tunnel is constructed. The southbound on-ramp to and northbound off-ramp from SR 99 would feed directly into a reconfigured Alaskan Way South. The northbound off-ramp would have a general-purpose lane and a peak hour transit-only lane to accommodate transit coming from south or West Seattle. The reconfigured Alaskan Way South would have three lanes in each direction up to South King Street. A new trail, called the City Side Trail, would replace the existing waterfront bicycle/pedestrian facility located on the east side of Alaskan Way South. A tunnel operations building would be constructed in the block bounded by South Dearborn Street and Alaskan Way South. Full northbound and southbound access to and from SR 99 would be provided near Harrison and Republican Streets and surface streets would be rebuilt and improved in the north portal area. Costs of implementing the Bored Tunnel Alternative are estimated at $1.9 billion based on completion of tunnel and portal improvements in 2015 and surface improvements in 2017. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The aging, structurally unsound viaduct would be replaced with up-to-date facilities capable of withstanding earthquakes and offering the capacity to maintain or improve mobility, safety, and accessibility for travelers and freight interests. Implementation would protect the integrity and viability of adjacent activities on the central waterfront and in downtown Seattle. Once the viaduct is removed, views to and from the waterfront would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require: partial or full acquisition of 11 commercial properties and 52 to 59 subsurface parcels; removal of three buildings and the relocation or displacement of an estimated 144 workers; removal of 570 parking spaces; and demolition of the existing viaduct and the Battery Street tunnel, both of which are eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at 48 of the 68 sites modeled for study. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft and first supplemental draft EISs, see 04-0469D, Volume 28, Number 4 and 06-0574D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100428, 141 pages (Oversized), Technical Reports--CD-ROM, October 22, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 29 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-04-01-DS2 KW - Demolition KW - Earthquakes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Parks KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133989?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.title=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 22, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). [Part 28 of 34] T2 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). AN - 873133987; 14698-8_0028 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Alaskan Way Viaduct (State Route 99) between S. Royal Brougham Way and Roy Street in downtown Seattle, King County, Washington is proposed. Damage sustained by the viaduct during the February 2001Nisqually earthquake compromised its structural integrity. This past damage, along with the age, design, and location of the existing viaduct, makes it vulnerable to future strong earthquakes, and damage from these quakes could make the structure unusable. State Route 99 (SR 99) and Interstate 5 are the primary north-south limited access routes through downtown Seattle. Failure of the viaduct would create severe hardship for the city and the region, and could result in injury or death. The March 2004 draft EIS analyzed five build alternatives and a No Build Alternative. After further study and public input, the number of build alternatives was reduced to two, the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel and Elevated Structure alternatives, which were evaluated in the 2006 supplemental draft EIS. A new Bored Tunnel Alternative was proposed in 2009 along with complementary improvements including a restored seawall; a new waterfront surface street and connection from the waterfront to Western and Elliott Avenues; a waterfront promenade; transit enhancements; and a streetcar on First Avenue. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes the Bored Tunnel Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, and compares it to the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel, Elevated Structure, and No Build alternatives. The Bored Tunnel Alternative would replace SR 99 with a tunnel that would have two lanes in each direction. Southbound lanes would be located on the top portion of the tunnel, and the northbound lanes would be located on the bottom. Travel lanes would be 11 feet wide, with a two-foot-wide shoulder on one side and a six-foot-wide shoulder on the other side. Access to and from SR 99 would be provided via ramp connections at the south portal north of S. Royal Brougham Way and the north portal near Harrison and Republican Streets. Unlike the existing connections, ramps to and from Columbia and Seneca Streets or Elliott and Western Avenues would not be provided. This alternative would remove the viaduct along the Seattle waterfront and would close and fill the Battery Street Tunnel after the bored tunnel is constructed. The southbound on-ramp to and northbound off-ramp from SR 99 would feed directly into a reconfigured Alaskan Way South. The northbound off-ramp would have a general-purpose lane and a peak hour transit-only lane to accommodate transit coming from south or West Seattle. The reconfigured Alaskan Way South would have three lanes in each direction up to South King Street. A new trail, called the City Side Trail, would replace the existing waterfront bicycle/pedestrian facility located on the east side of Alaskan Way South. A tunnel operations building would be constructed in the block bounded by South Dearborn Street and Alaskan Way South. Full northbound and southbound access to and from SR 99 would be provided near Harrison and Republican Streets and surface streets would be rebuilt and improved in the north portal area. Costs of implementing the Bored Tunnel Alternative are estimated at $1.9 billion based on completion of tunnel and portal improvements in 2015 and surface improvements in 2017. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The aging, structurally unsound viaduct would be replaced with up-to-date facilities capable of withstanding earthquakes and offering the capacity to maintain or improve mobility, safety, and accessibility for travelers and freight interests. Implementation would protect the integrity and viability of adjacent activities on the central waterfront and in downtown Seattle. Once the viaduct is removed, views to and from the waterfront would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require: partial or full acquisition of 11 commercial properties and 52 to 59 subsurface parcels; removal of three buildings and the relocation or displacement of an estimated 144 workers; removal of 570 parking spaces; and demolition of the existing viaduct and the Battery Street tunnel, both of which are eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at 48 of the 68 sites modeled for study. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft and first supplemental draft EISs, see 04-0469D, Volume 28, Number 4 and 06-0574D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100428, 141 pages (Oversized), Technical Reports--CD-ROM, October 22, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 28 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-04-01-DS2 KW - Demolition KW - Earthquakes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Parks KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133987?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.title=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 22, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). [Part 26 of 34] T2 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). AN - 873133986; 14698-8_0026 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Alaskan Way Viaduct (State Route 99) between S. Royal Brougham Way and Roy Street in downtown Seattle, King County, Washington is proposed. Damage sustained by the viaduct during the February 2001Nisqually earthquake compromised its structural integrity. This past damage, along with the age, design, and location of the existing viaduct, makes it vulnerable to future strong earthquakes, and damage from these quakes could make the structure unusable. State Route 99 (SR 99) and Interstate 5 are the primary north-south limited access routes through downtown Seattle. Failure of the viaduct would create severe hardship for the city and the region, and could result in injury or death. The March 2004 draft EIS analyzed five build alternatives and a No Build Alternative. After further study and public input, the number of build alternatives was reduced to two, the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel and Elevated Structure alternatives, which were evaluated in the 2006 supplemental draft EIS. A new Bored Tunnel Alternative was proposed in 2009 along with complementary improvements including a restored seawall; a new waterfront surface street and connection from the waterfront to Western and Elliott Avenues; a waterfront promenade; transit enhancements; and a streetcar on First Avenue. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes the Bored Tunnel Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, and compares it to the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel, Elevated Structure, and No Build alternatives. The Bored Tunnel Alternative would replace SR 99 with a tunnel that would have two lanes in each direction. Southbound lanes would be located on the top portion of the tunnel, and the northbound lanes would be located on the bottom. Travel lanes would be 11 feet wide, with a two-foot-wide shoulder on one side and a six-foot-wide shoulder on the other side. Access to and from SR 99 would be provided via ramp connections at the south portal north of S. Royal Brougham Way and the north portal near Harrison and Republican Streets. Unlike the existing connections, ramps to and from Columbia and Seneca Streets or Elliott and Western Avenues would not be provided. This alternative would remove the viaduct along the Seattle waterfront and would close and fill the Battery Street Tunnel after the bored tunnel is constructed. The southbound on-ramp to and northbound off-ramp from SR 99 would feed directly into a reconfigured Alaskan Way South. The northbound off-ramp would have a general-purpose lane and a peak hour transit-only lane to accommodate transit coming from south or West Seattle. The reconfigured Alaskan Way South would have three lanes in each direction up to South King Street. A new trail, called the City Side Trail, would replace the existing waterfront bicycle/pedestrian facility located on the east side of Alaskan Way South. A tunnel operations building would be constructed in the block bounded by South Dearborn Street and Alaskan Way South. Full northbound and southbound access to and from SR 99 would be provided near Harrison and Republican Streets and surface streets would be rebuilt and improved in the north portal area. Costs of implementing the Bored Tunnel Alternative are estimated at $1.9 billion based on completion of tunnel and portal improvements in 2015 and surface improvements in 2017. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The aging, structurally unsound viaduct would be replaced with up-to-date facilities capable of withstanding earthquakes and offering the capacity to maintain or improve mobility, safety, and accessibility for travelers and freight interests. Implementation would protect the integrity and viability of adjacent activities on the central waterfront and in downtown Seattle. Once the viaduct is removed, views to and from the waterfront would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require: partial or full acquisition of 11 commercial properties and 52 to 59 subsurface parcels; removal of three buildings and the relocation or displacement of an estimated 144 workers; removal of 570 parking spaces; and demolition of the existing viaduct and the Battery Street tunnel, both of which are eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at 48 of the 68 sites modeled for study. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft and first supplemental draft EISs, see 04-0469D, Volume 28, Number 4 and 06-0574D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100428, 141 pages (Oversized), Technical Reports--CD-ROM, October 22, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 26 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-04-01-DS2 KW - Demolition KW - Earthquakes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Parks KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133986?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.title=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 22, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). [Part 25 of 34] T2 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). AN - 873133984; 14698-8_0025 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Alaskan Way Viaduct (State Route 99) between S. Royal Brougham Way and Roy Street in downtown Seattle, King County, Washington is proposed. Damage sustained by the viaduct during the February 2001Nisqually earthquake compromised its structural integrity. This past damage, along with the age, design, and location of the existing viaduct, makes it vulnerable to future strong earthquakes, and damage from these quakes could make the structure unusable. State Route 99 (SR 99) and Interstate 5 are the primary north-south limited access routes through downtown Seattle. Failure of the viaduct would create severe hardship for the city and the region, and could result in injury or death. The March 2004 draft EIS analyzed five build alternatives and a No Build Alternative. After further study and public input, the number of build alternatives was reduced to two, the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel and Elevated Structure alternatives, which were evaluated in the 2006 supplemental draft EIS. A new Bored Tunnel Alternative was proposed in 2009 along with complementary improvements including a restored seawall; a new waterfront surface street and connection from the waterfront to Western and Elliott Avenues; a waterfront promenade; transit enhancements; and a streetcar on First Avenue. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes the Bored Tunnel Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, and compares it to the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel, Elevated Structure, and No Build alternatives. The Bored Tunnel Alternative would replace SR 99 with a tunnel that would have two lanes in each direction. Southbound lanes would be located on the top portion of the tunnel, and the northbound lanes would be located on the bottom. Travel lanes would be 11 feet wide, with a two-foot-wide shoulder on one side and a six-foot-wide shoulder on the other side. Access to and from SR 99 would be provided via ramp connections at the south portal north of S. Royal Brougham Way and the north portal near Harrison and Republican Streets. Unlike the existing connections, ramps to and from Columbia and Seneca Streets or Elliott and Western Avenues would not be provided. This alternative would remove the viaduct along the Seattle waterfront and would close and fill the Battery Street Tunnel after the bored tunnel is constructed. The southbound on-ramp to and northbound off-ramp from SR 99 would feed directly into a reconfigured Alaskan Way South. The northbound off-ramp would have a general-purpose lane and a peak hour transit-only lane to accommodate transit coming from south or West Seattle. The reconfigured Alaskan Way South would have three lanes in each direction up to South King Street. A new trail, called the City Side Trail, would replace the existing waterfront bicycle/pedestrian facility located on the east side of Alaskan Way South. A tunnel operations building would be constructed in the block bounded by South Dearborn Street and Alaskan Way South. Full northbound and southbound access to and from SR 99 would be provided near Harrison and Republican Streets and surface streets would be rebuilt and improved in the north portal area. Costs of implementing the Bored Tunnel Alternative are estimated at $1.9 billion based on completion of tunnel and portal improvements in 2015 and surface improvements in 2017. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The aging, structurally unsound viaduct would be replaced with up-to-date facilities capable of withstanding earthquakes and offering the capacity to maintain or improve mobility, safety, and accessibility for travelers and freight interests. Implementation would protect the integrity and viability of adjacent activities on the central waterfront and in downtown Seattle. Once the viaduct is removed, views to and from the waterfront would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require: partial or full acquisition of 11 commercial properties and 52 to 59 subsurface parcels; removal of three buildings and the relocation or displacement of an estimated 144 workers; removal of 570 parking spaces; and demolition of the existing viaduct and the Battery Street tunnel, both of which are eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at 48 of the 68 sites modeled for study. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft and first supplemental draft EISs, see 04-0469D, Volume 28, Number 4 and 06-0574D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100428, 141 pages (Oversized), Technical Reports--CD-ROM, October 22, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 25 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-04-01-DS2 KW - Demolition KW - Earthquakes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Parks KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133984?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.title=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 22, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). [Part 24 of 34] T2 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). AN - 873133981; 14698-8_0024 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Alaskan Way Viaduct (State Route 99) between S. Royal Brougham Way and Roy Street in downtown Seattle, King County, Washington is proposed. Damage sustained by the viaduct during the February 2001Nisqually earthquake compromised its structural integrity. This past damage, along with the age, design, and location of the existing viaduct, makes it vulnerable to future strong earthquakes, and damage from these quakes could make the structure unusable. State Route 99 (SR 99) and Interstate 5 are the primary north-south limited access routes through downtown Seattle. Failure of the viaduct would create severe hardship for the city and the region, and could result in injury or death. The March 2004 draft EIS analyzed five build alternatives and a No Build Alternative. After further study and public input, the number of build alternatives was reduced to two, the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel and Elevated Structure alternatives, which were evaluated in the 2006 supplemental draft EIS. A new Bored Tunnel Alternative was proposed in 2009 along with complementary improvements including a restored seawall; a new waterfront surface street and connection from the waterfront to Western and Elliott Avenues; a waterfront promenade; transit enhancements; and a streetcar on First Avenue. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes the Bored Tunnel Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, and compares it to the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel, Elevated Structure, and No Build alternatives. The Bored Tunnel Alternative would replace SR 99 with a tunnel that would have two lanes in each direction. Southbound lanes would be located on the top portion of the tunnel, and the northbound lanes would be located on the bottom. Travel lanes would be 11 feet wide, with a two-foot-wide shoulder on one side and a six-foot-wide shoulder on the other side. Access to and from SR 99 would be provided via ramp connections at the south portal north of S. Royal Brougham Way and the north portal near Harrison and Republican Streets. Unlike the existing connections, ramps to and from Columbia and Seneca Streets or Elliott and Western Avenues would not be provided. This alternative would remove the viaduct along the Seattle waterfront and would close and fill the Battery Street Tunnel after the bored tunnel is constructed. The southbound on-ramp to and northbound off-ramp from SR 99 would feed directly into a reconfigured Alaskan Way South. The northbound off-ramp would have a general-purpose lane and a peak hour transit-only lane to accommodate transit coming from south or West Seattle. The reconfigured Alaskan Way South would have three lanes in each direction up to South King Street. A new trail, called the City Side Trail, would replace the existing waterfront bicycle/pedestrian facility located on the east side of Alaskan Way South. A tunnel operations building would be constructed in the block bounded by South Dearborn Street and Alaskan Way South. Full northbound and southbound access to and from SR 99 would be provided near Harrison and Republican Streets and surface streets would be rebuilt and improved in the north portal area. Costs of implementing the Bored Tunnel Alternative are estimated at $1.9 billion based on completion of tunnel and portal improvements in 2015 and surface improvements in 2017. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The aging, structurally unsound viaduct would be replaced with up-to-date facilities capable of withstanding earthquakes and offering the capacity to maintain or improve mobility, safety, and accessibility for travelers and freight interests. Implementation would protect the integrity and viability of adjacent activities on the central waterfront and in downtown Seattle. Once the viaduct is removed, views to and from the waterfront would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require: partial or full acquisition of 11 commercial properties and 52 to 59 subsurface parcels; removal of three buildings and the relocation or displacement of an estimated 144 workers; removal of 570 parking spaces; and demolition of the existing viaduct and the Battery Street tunnel, both of which are eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at 48 of the 68 sites modeled for study. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft and first supplemental draft EISs, see 04-0469D, Volume 28, Number 4 and 06-0574D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100428, 141 pages (Oversized), Technical Reports--CD-ROM, October 22, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 24 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-04-01-DS2 KW - Demolition KW - Earthquakes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Parks KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133981?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.title=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 22, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). [Part 12 of 34] T2 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). AN - 873133975; 14698-8_0012 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Alaskan Way Viaduct (State Route 99) between S. Royal Brougham Way and Roy Street in downtown Seattle, King County, Washington is proposed. Damage sustained by the viaduct during the February 2001Nisqually earthquake compromised its structural integrity. This past damage, along with the age, design, and location of the existing viaduct, makes it vulnerable to future strong earthquakes, and damage from these quakes could make the structure unusable. State Route 99 (SR 99) and Interstate 5 are the primary north-south limited access routes through downtown Seattle. Failure of the viaduct would create severe hardship for the city and the region, and could result in injury or death. The March 2004 draft EIS analyzed five build alternatives and a No Build Alternative. After further study and public input, the number of build alternatives was reduced to two, the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel and Elevated Structure alternatives, which were evaluated in the 2006 supplemental draft EIS. A new Bored Tunnel Alternative was proposed in 2009 along with complementary improvements including a restored seawall; a new waterfront surface street and connection from the waterfront to Western and Elliott Avenues; a waterfront promenade; transit enhancements; and a streetcar on First Avenue. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes the Bored Tunnel Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, and compares it to the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel, Elevated Structure, and No Build alternatives. The Bored Tunnel Alternative would replace SR 99 with a tunnel that would have two lanes in each direction. Southbound lanes would be located on the top portion of the tunnel, and the northbound lanes would be located on the bottom. Travel lanes would be 11 feet wide, with a two-foot-wide shoulder on one side and a six-foot-wide shoulder on the other side. Access to and from SR 99 would be provided via ramp connections at the south portal north of S. Royal Brougham Way and the north portal near Harrison and Republican Streets. Unlike the existing connections, ramps to and from Columbia and Seneca Streets or Elliott and Western Avenues would not be provided. This alternative would remove the viaduct along the Seattle waterfront and would close and fill the Battery Street Tunnel after the bored tunnel is constructed. The southbound on-ramp to and northbound off-ramp from SR 99 would feed directly into a reconfigured Alaskan Way South. The northbound off-ramp would have a general-purpose lane and a peak hour transit-only lane to accommodate transit coming from south or West Seattle. The reconfigured Alaskan Way South would have three lanes in each direction up to South King Street. A new trail, called the City Side Trail, would replace the existing waterfront bicycle/pedestrian facility located on the east side of Alaskan Way South. A tunnel operations building would be constructed in the block bounded by South Dearborn Street and Alaskan Way South. Full northbound and southbound access to and from SR 99 would be provided near Harrison and Republican Streets and surface streets would be rebuilt and improved in the north portal area. Costs of implementing the Bored Tunnel Alternative are estimated at $1.9 billion based on completion of tunnel and portal improvements in 2015 and surface improvements in 2017. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The aging, structurally unsound viaduct would be replaced with up-to-date facilities capable of withstanding earthquakes and offering the capacity to maintain or improve mobility, safety, and accessibility for travelers and freight interests. Implementation would protect the integrity and viability of adjacent activities on the central waterfront and in downtown Seattle. Once the viaduct is removed, views to and from the waterfront would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require: partial or full acquisition of 11 commercial properties and 52 to 59 subsurface parcels; removal of three buildings and the relocation or displacement of an estimated 144 workers; removal of 570 parking spaces; and demolition of the existing viaduct and the Battery Street tunnel, both of which are eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at 48 of the 68 sites modeled for study. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft and first supplemental draft EISs, see 04-0469D, Volume 28, Number 4 and 06-0574D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100428, 141 pages (Oversized), Technical Reports--CD-ROM, October 22, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-04-01-DS2 KW - Demolition KW - Earthquakes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Parks KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133975?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.title=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 22, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). [Part 11 of 34] T2 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). AN - 873133974; 14698-8_0011 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Alaskan Way Viaduct (State Route 99) between S. Royal Brougham Way and Roy Street in downtown Seattle, King County, Washington is proposed. Damage sustained by the viaduct during the February 2001Nisqually earthquake compromised its structural integrity. This past damage, along with the age, design, and location of the existing viaduct, makes it vulnerable to future strong earthquakes, and damage from these quakes could make the structure unusable. State Route 99 (SR 99) and Interstate 5 are the primary north-south limited access routes through downtown Seattle. Failure of the viaduct would create severe hardship for the city and the region, and could result in injury or death. The March 2004 draft EIS analyzed five build alternatives and a No Build Alternative. After further study and public input, the number of build alternatives was reduced to two, the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel and Elevated Structure alternatives, which were evaluated in the 2006 supplemental draft EIS. A new Bored Tunnel Alternative was proposed in 2009 along with complementary improvements including a restored seawall; a new waterfront surface street and connection from the waterfront to Western and Elliott Avenues; a waterfront promenade; transit enhancements; and a streetcar on First Avenue. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes the Bored Tunnel Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, and compares it to the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel, Elevated Structure, and No Build alternatives. The Bored Tunnel Alternative would replace SR 99 with a tunnel that would have two lanes in each direction. Southbound lanes would be located on the top portion of the tunnel, and the northbound lanes would be located on the bottom. Travel lanes would be 11 feet wide, with a two-foot-wide shoulder on one side and a six-foot-wide shoulder on the other side. Access to and from SR 99 would be provided via ramp connections at the south portal north of S. Royal Brougham Way and the north portal near Harrison and Republican Streets. Unlike the existing connections, ramps to and from Columbia and Seneca Streets or Elliott and Western Avenues would not be provided. This alternative would remove the viaduct along the Seattle waterfront and would close and fill the Battery Street Tunnel after the bored tunnel is constructed. The southbound on-ramp to and northbound off-ramp from SR 99 would feed directly into a reconfigured Alaskan Way South. The northbound off-ramp would have a general-purpose lane and a peak hour transit-only lane to accommodate transit coming from south or West Seattle. The reconfigured Alaskan Way South would have three lanes in each direction up to South King Street. A new trail, called the City Side Trail, would replace the existing waterfront bicycle/pedestrian facility located on the east side of Alaskan Way South. A tunnel operations building would be constructed in the block bounded by South Dearborn Street and Alaskan Way South. Full northbound and southbound access to and from SR 99 would be provided near Harrison and Republican Streets and surface streets would be rebuilt and improved in the north portal area. Costs of implementing the Bored Tunnel Alternative are estimated at $1.9 billion based on completion of tunnel and portal improvements in 2015 and surface improvements in 2017. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The aging, structurally unsound viaduct would be replaced with up-to-date facilities capable of withstanding earthquakes and offering the capacity to maintain or improve mobility, safety, and accessibility for travelers and freight interests. Implementation would protect the integrity and viability of adjacent activities on the central waterfront and in downtown Seattle. Once the viaduct is removed, views to and from the waterfront would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require: partial or full acquisition of 11 commercial properties and 52 to 59 subsurface parcels; removal of three buildings and the relocation or displacement of an estimated 144 workers; removal of 570 parking spaces; and demolition of the existing viaduct and the Battery Street tunnel, both of which are eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at 48 of the 68 sites modeled for study. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft and first supplemental draft EISs, see 04-0469D, Volume 28, Number 4 and 06-0574D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100428, 141 pages (Oversized), Technical Reports--CD-ROM, October 22, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-04-01-DS2 KW - Demolition KW - Earthquakes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Parks KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133974?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.title=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 22, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). [Part 10 of 34] T2 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). AN - 873133973; 14698-8_0010 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Alaskan Way Viaduct (State Route 99) between S. Royal Brougham Way and Roy Street in downtown Seattle, King County, Washington is proposed. Damage sustained by the viaduct during the February 2001Nisqually earthquake compromised its structural integrity. This past damage, along with the age, design, and location of the existing viaduct, makes it vulnerable to future strong earthquakes, and damage from these quakes could make the structure unusable. State Route 99 (SR 99) and Interstate 5 are the primary north-south limited access routes through downtown Seattle. Failure of the viaduct would create severe hardship for the city and the region, and could result in injury or death. The March 2004 draft EIS analyzed five build alternatives and a No Build Alternative. After further study and public input, the number of build alternatives was reduced to two, the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel and Elevated Structure alternatives, which were evaluated in the 2006 supplemental draft EIS. A new Bored Tunnel Alternative was proposed in 2009 along with complementary improvements including a restored seawall; a new waterfront surface street and connection from the waterfront to Western and Elliott Avenues; a waterfront promenade; transit enhancements; and a streetcar on First Avenue. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes the Bored Tunnel Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, and compares it to the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel, Elevated Structure, and No Build alternatives. The Bored Tunnel Alternative would replace SR 99 with a tunnel that would have two lanes in each direction. Southbound lanes would be located on the top portion of the tunnel, and the northbound lanes would be located on the bottom. Travel lanes would be 11 feet wide, with a two-foot-wide shoulder on one side and a six-foot-wide shoulder on the other side. Access to and from SR 99 would be provided via ramp connections at the south portal north of S. Royal Brougham Way and the north portal near Harrison and Republican Streets. Unlike the existing connections, ramps to and from Columbia and Seneca Streets or Elliott and Western Avenues would not be provided. This alternative would remove the viaduct along the Seattle waterfront and would close and fill the Battery Street Tunnel after the bored tunnel is constructed. The southbound on-ramp to and northbound off-ramp from SR 99 would feed directly into a reconfigured Alaskan Way South. The northbound off-ramp would have a general-purpose lane and a peak hour transit-only lane to accommodate transit coming from south or West Seattle. The reconfigured Alaskan Way South would have three lanes in each direction up to South King Street. A new trail, called the City Side Trail, would replace the existing waterfront bicycle/pedestrian facility located on the east side of Alaskan Way South. A tunnel operations building would be constructed in the block bounded by South Dearborn Street and Alaskan Way South. Full northbound and southbound access to and from SR 99 would be provided near Harrison and Republican Streets and surface streets would be rebuilt and improved in the north portal area. Costs of implementing the Bored Tunnel Alternative are estimated at $1.9 billion based on completion of tunnel and portal improvements in 2015 and surface improvements in 2017. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The aging, structurally unsound viaduct would be replaced with up-to-date facilities capable of withstanding earthquakes and offering the capacity to maintain or improve mobility, safety, and accessibility for travelers and freight interests. Implementation would protect the integrity and viability of adjacent activities on the central waterfront and in downtown Seattle. Once the viaduct is removed, views to and from the waterfront would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require: partial or full acquisition of 11 commercial properties and 52 to 59 subsurface parcels; removal of three buildings and the relocation or displacement of an estimated 144 workers; removal of 570 parking spaces; and demolition of the existing viaduct and the Battery Street tunnel, both of which are eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at 48 of the 68 sites modeled for study. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft and first supplemental draft EISs, see 04-0469D, Volume 28, Number 4 and 06-0574D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100428, 141 pages (Oversized), Technical Reports--CD-ROM, October 22, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-04-01-DS2 KW - Demolition KW - Earthquakes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Parks KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133973?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.title=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 22, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). [Part 9 of 34] T2 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). AN - 873133968; 14698-8_0009 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Alaskan Way Viaduct (State Route 99) between S. Royal Brougham Way and Roy Street in downtown Seattle, King County, Washington is proposed. Damage sustained by the viaduct during the February 2001Nisqually earthquake compromised its structural integrity. This past damage, along with the age, design, and location of the existing viaduct, makes it vulnerable to future strong earthquakes, and damage from these quakes could make the structure unusable. State Route 99 (SR 99) and Interstate 5 are the primary north-south limited access routes through downtown Seattle. Failure of the viaduct would create severe hardship for the city and the region, and could result in injury or death. The March 2004 draft EIS analyzed five build alternatives and a No Build Alternative. After further study and public input, the number of build alternatives was reduced to two, the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel and Elevated Structure alternatives, which were evaluated in the 2006 supplemental draft EIS. A new Bored Tunnel Alternative was proposed in 2009 along with complementary improvements including a restored seawall; a new waterfront surface street and connection from the waterfront to Western and Elliott Avenues; a waterfront promenade; transit enhancements; and a streetcar on First Avenue. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes the Bored Tunnel Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, and compares it to the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel, Elevated Structure, and No Build alternatives. The Bored Tunnel Alternative would replace SR 99 with a tunnel that would have two lanes in each direction. Southbound lanes would be located on the top portion of the tunnel, and the northbound lanes would be located on the bottom. Travel lanes would be 11 feet wide, with a two-foot-wide shoulder on one side and a six-foot-wide shoulder on the other side. Access to and from SR 99 would be provided via ramp connections at the south portal north of S. Royal Brougham Way and the north portal near Harrison and Republican Streets. Unlike the existing connections, ramps to and from Columbia and Seneca Streets or Elliott and Western Avenues would not be provided. This alternative would remove the viaduct along the Seattle waterfront and would close and fill the Battery Street Tunnel after the bored tunnel is constructed. The southbound on-ramp to and northbound off-ramp from SR 99 would feed directly into a reconfigured Alaskan Way South. The northbound off-ramp would have a general-purpose lane and a peak hour transit-only lane to accommodate transit coming from south or West Seattle. The reconfigured Alaskan Way South would have three lanes in each direction up to South King Street. A new trail, called the City Side Trail, would replace the existing waterfront bicycle/pedestrian facility located on the east side of Alaskan Way South. A tunnel operations building would be constructed in the block bounded by South Dearborn Street and Alaskan Way South. Full northbound and southbound access to and from SR 99 would be provided near Harrison and Republican Streets and surface streets would be rebuilt and improved in the north portal area. Costs of implementing the Bored Tunnel Alternative are estimated at $1.9 billion based on completion of tunnel and portal improvements in 2015 and surface improvements in 2017. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The aging, structurally unsound viaduct would be replaced with up-to-date facilities capable of withstanding earthquakes and offering the capacity to maintain or improve mobility, safety, and accessibility for travelers and freight interests. Implementation would protect the integrity and viability of adjacent activities on the central waterfront and in downtown Seattle. Once the viaduct is removed, views to and from the waterfront would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require: partial or full acquisition of 11 commercial properties and 52 to 59 subsurface parcels; removal of three buildings and the relocation or displacement of an estimated 144 workers; removal of 570 parking spaces; and demolition of the existing viaduct and the Battery Street tunnel, both of which are eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at 48 of the 68 sites modeled for study. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft and first supplemental draft EISs, see 04-0469D, Volume 28, Number 4 and 06-0574D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100428, 141 pages (Oversized), Technical Reports--CD-ROM, October 22, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-04-01-DS2 KW - Demolition KW - Earthquakes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Parks KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133968?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.title=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 22, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). [Part 27 of 34] T2 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). AN - 873133558; 14698-8_0027 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Alaskan Way Viaduct (State Route 99) between S. Royal Brougham Way and Roy Street in downtown Seattle, King County, Washington is proposed. Damage sustained by the viaduct during the February 2001Nisqually earthquake compromised its structural integrity. This past damage, along with the age, design, and location of the existing viaduct, makes it vulnerable to future strong earthquakes, and damage from these quakes could make the structure unusable. State Route 99 (SR 99) and Interstate 5 are the primary north-south limited access routes through downtown Seattle. Failure of the viaduct would create severe hardship for the city and the region, and could result in injury or death. The March 2004 draft EIS analyzed five build alternatives and a No Build Alternative. After further study and public input, the number of build alternatives was reduced to two, the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel and Elevated Structure alternatives, which were evaluated in the 2006 supplemental draft EIS. A new Bored Tunnel Alternative was proposed in 2009 along with complementary improvements including a restored seawall; a new waterfront surface street and connection from the waterfront to Western and Elliott Avenues; a waterfront promenade; transit enhancements; and a streetcar on First Avenue. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes the Bored Tunnel Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, and compares it to the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel, Elevated Structure, and No Build alternatives. The Bored Tunnel Alternative would replace SR 99 with a tunnel that would have two lanes in each direction. Southbound lanes would be located on the top portion of the tunnel, and the northbound lanes would be located on the bottom. Travel lanes would be 11 feet wide, with a two-foot-wide shoulder on one side and a six-foot-wide shoulder on the other side. Access to and from SR 99 would be provided via ramp connections at the south portal north of S. Royal Brougham Way and the north portal near Harrison and Republican Streets. Unlike the existing connections, ramps to and from Columbia and Seneca Streets or Elliott and Western Avenues would not be provided. This alternative would remove the viaduct along the Seattle waterfront and would close and fill the Battery Street Tunnel after the bored tunnel is constructed. The southbound on-ramp to and northbound off-ramp from SR 99 would feed directly into a reconfigured Alaskan Way South. The northbound off-ramp would have a general-purpose lane and a peak hour transit-only lane to accommodate transit coming from south or West Seattle. The reconfigured Alaskan Way South would have three lanes in each direction up to South King Street. A new trail, called the City Side Trail, would replace the existing waterfront bicycle/pedestrian facility located on the east side of Alaskan Way South. A tunnel operations building would be constructed in the block bounded by South Dearborn Street and Alaskan Way South. Full northbound and southbound access to and from SR 99 would be provided near Harrison and Republican Streets and surface streets would be rebuilt and improved in the north portal area. Costs of implementing the Bored Tunnel Alternative are estimated at $1.9 billion based on completion of tunnel and portal improvements in 2015 and surface improvements in 2017. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The aging, structurally unsound viaduct would be replaced with up-to-date facilities capable of withstanding earthquakes and offering the capacity to maintain or improve mobility, safety, and accessibility for travelers and freight interests. Implementation would protect the integrity and viability of adjacent activities on the central waterfront and in downtown Seattle. Once the viaduct is removed, views to and from the waterfront would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require: partial or full acquisition of 11 commercial properties and 52 to 59 subsurface parcels; removal of three buildings and the relocation or displacement of an estimated 144 workers; removal of 570 parking spaces; and demolition of the existing viaduct and the Battery Street tunnel, both of which are eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at 48 of the 68 sites modeled for study. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft and first supplemental draft EISs, see 04-0469D, Volume 28, Number 4 and 06-0574D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100428, 141 pages (Oversized), Technical Reports--CD-ROM, October 22, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 27 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-04-01-DS2 KW - Demolition KW - Earthquakes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Parks KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133558?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.title=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 22, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). [Part 22 of 34] T2 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). AN - 873133350; 14698-8_0022 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Alaskan Way Viaduct (State Route 99) between S. Royal Brougham Way and Roy Street in downtown Seattle, King County, Washington is proposed. Damage sustained by the viaduct during the February 2001Nisqually earthquake compromised its structural integrity. This past damage, along with the age, design, and location of the existing viaduct, makes it vulnerable to future strong earthquakes, and damage from these quakes could make the structure unusable. State Route 99 (SR 99) and Interstate 5 are the primary north-south limited access routes through downtown Seattle. Failure of the viaduct would create severe hardship for the city and the region, and could result in injury or death. The March 2004 draft EIS analyzed five build alternatives and a No Build Alternative. After further study and public input, the number of build alternatives was reduced to two, the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel and Elevated Structure alternatives, which were evaluated in the 2006 supplemental draft EIS. A new Bored Tunnel Alternative was proposed in 2009 along with complementary improvements including a restored seawall; a new waterfront surface street and connection from the waterfront to Western and Elliott Avenues; a waterfront promenade; transit enhancements; and a streetcar on First Avenue. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes the Bored Tunnel Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, and compares it to the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel, Elevated Structure, and No Build alternatives. The Bored Tunnel Alternative would replace SR 99 with a tunnel that would have two lanes in each direction. Southbound lanes would be located on the top portion of the tunnel, and the northbound lanes would be located on the bottom. Travel lanes would be 11 feet wide, with a two-foot-wide shoulder on one side and a six-foot-wide shoulder on the other side. Access to and from SR 99 would be provided via ramp connections at the south portal north of S. Royal Brougham Way and the north portal near Harrison and Republican Streets. Unlike the existing connections, ramps to and from Columbia and Seneca Streets or Elliott and Western Avenues would not be provided. This alternative would remove the viaduct along the Seattle waterfront and would close and fill the Battery Street Tunnel after the bored tunnel is constructed. The southbound on-ramp to and northbound off-ramp from SR 99 would feed directly into a reconfigured Alaskan Way South. The northbound off-ramp would have a general-purpose lane and a peak hour transit-only lane to accommodate transit coming from south or West Seattle. The reconfigured Alaskan Way South would have three lanes in each direction up to South King Street. A new trail, called the City Side Trail, would replace the existing waterfront bicycle/pedestrian facility located on the east side of Alaskan Way South. A tunnel operations building would be constructed in the block bounded by South Dearborn Street and Alaskan Way South. Full northbound and southbound access to and from SR 99 would be provided near Harrison and Republican Streets and surface streets would be rebuilt and improved in the north portal area. Costs of implementing the Bored Tunnel Alternative are estimated at $1.9 billion based on completion of tunnel and portal improvements in 2015 and surface improvements in 2017. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The aging, structurally unsound viaduct would be replaced with up-to-date facilities capable of withstanding earthquakes and offering the capacity to maintain or improve mobility, safety, and accessibility for travelers and freight interests. Implementation would protect the integrity and viability of adjacent activities on the central waterfront and in downtown Seattle. Once the viaduct is removed, views to and from the waterfront would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require: partial or full acquisition of 11 commercial properties and 52 to 59 subsurface parcels; removal of three buildings and the relocation or displacement of an estimated 144 workers; removal of 570 parking spaces; and demolition of the existing viaduct and the Battery Street tunnel, both of which are eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at 48 of the 68 sites modeled for study. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft and first supplemental draft EISs, see 04-0469D, Volume 28, Number 4 and 06-0574D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100428, 141 pages (Oversized), Technical Reports--CD-ROM, October 22, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 22 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-04-01-DS2 KW - Demolition KW - Earthquakes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Parks KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133350?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.title=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 22, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). [Part 21 of 34] T2 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). AN - 873133345; 14698-8_0021 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Alaskan Way Viaduct (State Route 99) between S. Royal Brougham Way and Roy Street in downtown Seattle, King County, Washington is proposed. Damage sustained by the viaduct during the February 2001Nisqually earthquake compromised its structural integrity. This past damage, along with the age, design, and location of the existing viaduct, makes it vulnerable to future strong earthquakes, and damage from these quakes could make the structure unusable. State Route 99 (SR 99) and Interstate 5 are the primary north-south limited access routes through downtown Seattle. Failure of the viaduct would create severe hardship for the city and the region, and could result in injury or death. The March 2004 draft EIS analyzed five build alternatives and a No Build Alternative. After further study and public input, the number of build alternatives was reduced to two, the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel and Elevated Structure alternatives, which were evaluated in the 2006 supplemental draft EIS. A new Bored Tunnel Alternative was proposed in 2009 along with complementary improvements including a restored seawall; a new waterfront surface street and connection from the waterfront to Western and Elliott Avenues; a waterfront promenade; transit enhancements; and a streetcar on First Avenue. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes the Bored Tunnel Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, and compares it to the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel, Elevated Structure, and No Build alternatives. The Bored Tunnel Alternative would replace SR 99 with a tunnel that would have two lanes in each direction. Southbound lanes would be located on the top portion of the tunnel, and the northbound lanes would be located on the bottom. Travel lanes would be 11 feet wide, with a two-foot-wide shoulder on one side and a six-foot-wide shoulder on the other side. Access to and from SR 99 would be provided via ramp connections at the south portal north of S. Royal Brougham Way and the north portal near Harrison and Republican Streets. Unlike the existing connections, ramps to and from Columbia and Seneca Streets or Elliott and Western Avenues would not be provided. This alternative would remove the viaduct along the Seattle waterfront and would close and fill the Battery Street Tunnel after the bored tunnel is constructed. The southbound on-ramp to and northbound off-ramp from SR 99 would feed directly into a reconfigured Alaskan Way South. The northbound off-ramp would have a general-purpose lane and a peak hour transit-only lane to accommodate transit coming from south or West Seattle. The reconfigured Alaskan Way South would have three lanes in each direction up to South King Street. A new trail, called the City Side Trail, would replace the existing waterfront bicycle/pedestrian facility located on the east side of Alaskan Way South. A tunnel operations building would be constructed in the block bounded by South Dearborn Street and Alaskan Way South. Full northbound and southbound access to and from SR 99 would be provided near Harrison and Republican Streets and surface streets would be rebuilt and improved in the north portal area. Costs of implementing the Bored Tunnel Alternative are estimated at $1.9 billion based on completion of tunnel and portal improvements in 2015 and surface improvements in 2017. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The aging, structurally unsound viaduct would be replaced with up-to-date facilities capable of withstanding earthquakes and offering the capacity to maintain or improve mobility, safety, and accessibility for travelers and freight interests. Implementation would protect the integrity and viability of adjacent activities on the central waterfront and in downtown Seattle. Once the viaduct is removed, views to and from the waterfront would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require: partial or full acquisition of 11 commercial properties and 52 to 59 subsurface parcels; removal of three buildings and the relocation or displacement of an estimated 144 workers; removal of 570 parking spaces; and demolition of the existing viaduct and the Battery Street tunnel, both of which are eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at 48 of the 68 sites modeled for study. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft and first supplemental draft EISs, see 04-0469D, Volume 28, Number 4 and 06-0574D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100428, 141 pages (Oversized), Technical Reports--CD-ROM, October 22, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 21 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-04-01-DS2 KW - Demolition KW - Earthquakes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Parks KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133345?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.title=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 22, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). [Part 16 of 34] T2 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). AN - 873133342; 14698-8_0016 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Alaskan Way Viaduct (State Route 99) between S. Royal Brougham Way and Roy Street in downtown Seattle, King County, Washington is proposed. Damage sustained by the viaduct during the February 2001Nisqually earthquake compromised its structural integrity. This past damage, along with the age, design, and location of the existing viaduct, makes it vulnerable to future strong earthquakes, and damage from these quakes could make the structure unusable. State Route 99 (SR 99) and Interstate 5 are the primary north-south limited access routes through downtown Seattle. Failure of the viaduct would create severe hardship for the city and the region, and could result in injury or death. The March 2004 draft EIS analyzed five build alternatives and a No Build Alternative. After further study and public input, the number of build alternatives was reduced to two, the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel and Elevated Structure alternatives, which were evaluated in the 2006 supplemental draft EIS. A new Bored Tunnel Alternative was proposed in 2009 along with complementary improvements including a restored seawall; a new waterfront surface street and connection from the waterfront to Western and Elliott Avenues; a waterfront promenade; transit enhancements; and a streetcar on First Avenue. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes the Bored Tunnel Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, and compares it to the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel, Elevated Structure, and No Build alternatives. The Bored Tunnel Alternative would replace SR 99 with a tunnel that would have two lanes in each direction. Southbound lanes would be located on the top portion of the tunnel, and the northbound lanes would be located on the bottom. Travel lanes would be 11 feet wide, with a two-foot-wide shoulder on one side and a six-foot-wide shoulder on the other side. Access to and from SR 99 would be provided via ramp connections at the south portal north of S. Royal Brougham Way and the north portal near Harrison and Republican Streets. Unlike the existing connections, ramps to and from Columbia and Seneca Streets or Elliott and Western Avenues would not be provided. This alternative would remove the viaduct along the Seattle waterfront and would close and fill the Battery Street Tunnel after the bored tunnel is constructed. The southbound on-ramp to and northbound off-ramp from SR 99 would feed directly into a reconfigured Alaskan Way South. The northbound off-ramp would have a general-purpose lane and a peak hour transit-only lane to accommodate transit coming from south or West Seattle. The reconfigured Alaskan Way South would have three lanes in each direction up to South King Street. A new trail, called the City Side Trail, would replace the existing waterfront bicycle/pedestrian facility located on the east side of Alaskan Way South. A tunnel operations building would be constructed in the block bounded by South Dearborn Street and Alaskan Way South. Full northbound and southbound access to and from SR 99 would be provided near Harrison and Republican Streets and surface streets would be rebuilt and improved in the north portal area. Costs of implementing the Bored Tunnel Alternative are estimated at $1.9 billion based on completion of tunnel and portal improvements in 2015 and surface improvements in 2017. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The aging, structurally unsound viaduct would be replaced with up-to-date facilities capable of withstanding earthquakes and offering the capacity to maintain or improve mobility, safety, and accessibility for travelers and freight interests. Implementation would protect the integrity and viability of adjacent activities on the central waterfront and in downtown Seattle. Once the viaduct is removed, views to and from the waterfront would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require: partial or full acquisition of 11 commercial properties and 52 to 59 subsurface parcels; removal of three buildings and the relocation or displacement of an estimated 144 workers; removal of 570 parking spaces; and demolition of the existing viaduct and the Battery Street tunnel, both of which are eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at 48 of the 68 sites modeled for study. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft and first supplemental draft EISs, see 04-0469D, Volume 28, Number 4 and 06-0574D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100428, 141 pages (Oversized), Technical Reports--CD-ROM, October 22, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 16 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-04-01-DS2 KW - Demolition KW - Earthquakes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Parks KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133342?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.title=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 22, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). [Part 14 of 34] T2 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). AN - 873133334; 14698-8_0014 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Alaskan Way Viaduct (State Route 99) between S. Royal Brougham Way and Roy Street in downtown Seattle, King County, Washington is proposed. Damage sustained by the viaduct during the February 2001Nisqually earthquake compromised its structural integrity. This past damage, along with the age, design, and location of the existing viaduct, makes it vulnerable to future strong earthquakes, and damage from these quakes could make the structure unusable. State Route 99 (SR 99) and Interstate 5 are the primary north-south limited access routes through downtown Seattle. Failure of the viaduct would create severe hardship for the city and the region, and could result in injury or death. The March 2004 draft EIS analyzed five build alternatives and a No Build Alternative. After further study and public input, the number of build alternatives was reduced to two, the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel and Elevated Structure alternatives, which were evaluated in the 2006 supplemental draft EIS. A new Bored Tunnel Alternative was proposed in 2009 along with complementary improvements including a restored seawall; a new waterfront surface street and connection from the waterfront to Western and Elliott Avenues; a waterfront promenade; transit enhancements; and a streetcar on First Avenue. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes the Bored Tunnel Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, and compares it to the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel, Elevated Structure, and No Build alternatives. The Bored Tunnel Alternative would replace SR 99 with a tunnel that would have two lanes in each direction. Southbound lanes would be located on the top portion of the tunnel, and the northbound lanes would be located on the bottom. Travel lanes would be 11 feet wide, with a two-foot-wide shoulder on one side and a six-foot-wide shoulder on the other side. Access to and from SR 99 would be provided via ramp connections at the south portal north of S. Royal Brougham Way and the north portal near Harrison and Republican Streets. Unlike the existing connections, ramps to and from Columbia and Seneca Streets or Elliott and Western Avenues would not be provided. This alternative would remove the viaduct along the Seattle waterfront and would close and fill the Battery Street Tunnel after the bored tunnel is constructed. The southbound on-ramp to and northbound off-ramp from SR 99 would feed directly into a reconfigured Alaskan Way South. The northbound off-ramp would have a general-purpose lane and a peak hour transit-only lane to accommodate transit coming from south or West Seattle. The reconfigured Alaskan Way South would have three lanes in each direction up to South King Street. A new trail, called the City Side Trail, would replace the existing waterfront bicycle/pedestrian facility located on the east side of Alaskan Way South. A tunnel operations building would be constructed in the block bounded by South Dearborn Street and Alaskan Way South. Full northbound and southbound access to and from SR 99 would be provided near Harrison and Republican Streets and surface streets would be rebuilt and improved in the north portal area. Costs of implementing the Bored Tunnel Alternative are estimated at $1.9 billion based on completion of tunnel and portal improvements in 2015 and surface improvements in 2017. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The aging, structurally unsound viaduct would be replaced with up-to-date facilities capable of withstanding earthquakes and offering the capacity to maintain or improve mobility, safety, and accessibility for travelers and freight interests. Implementation would protect the integrity and viability of adjacent activities on the central waterfront and in downtown Seattle. Once the viaduct is removed, views to and from the waterfront would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require: partial or full acquisition of 11 commercial properties and 52 to 59 subsurface parcels; removal of three buildings and the relocation or displacement of an estimated 144 workers; removal of 570 parking spaces; and demolition of the existing viaduct and the Battery Street tunnel, both of which are eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at 48 of the 68 sites modeled for study. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft and first supplemental draft EISs, see 04-0469D, Volume 28, Number 4 and 06-0574D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100428, 141 pages (Oversized), Technical Reports--CD-ROM, October 22, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-04-01-DS2 KW - Demolition KW - Earthquakes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Parks KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133334?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.title=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 22, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). [Part 13 of 34] T2 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). AN - 873133330; 14698-8_0013 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Alaskan Way Viaduct (State Route 99) between S. Royal Brougham Way and Roy Street in downtown Seattle, King County, Washington is proposed. Damage sustained by the viaduct during the February 2001Nisqually earthquake compromised its structural integrity. This past damage, along with the age, design, and location of the existing viaduct, makes it vulnerable to future strong earthquakes, and damage from these quakes could make the structure unusable. State Route 99 (SR 99) and Interstate 5 are the primary north-south limited access routes through downtown Seattle. Failure of the viaduct would create severe hardship for the city and the region, and could result in injury or death. The March 2004 draft EIS analyzed five build alternatives and a No Build Alternative. After further study and public input, the number of build alternatives was reduced to two, the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel and Elevated Structure alternatives, which were evaluated in the 2006 supplemental draft EIS. A new Bored Tunnel Alternative was proposed in 2009 along with complementary improvements including a restored seawall; a new waterfront surface street and connection from the waterfront to Western and Elliott Avenues; a waterfront promenade; transit enhancements; and a streetcar on First Avenue. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes the Bored Tunnel Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, and compares it to the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel, Elevated Structure, and No Build alternatives. The Bored Tunnel Alternative would replace SR 99 with a tunnel that would have two lanes in each direction. Southbound lanes would be located on the top portion of the tunnel, and the northbound lanes would be located on the bottom. Travel lanes would be 11 feet wide, with a two-foot-wide shoulder on one side and a six-foot-wide shoulder on the other side. Access to and from SR 99 would be provided via ramp connections at the south portal north of S. Royal Brougham Way and the north portal near Harrison and Republican Streets. Unlike the existing connections, ramps to and from Columbia and Seneca Streets or Elliott and Western Avenues would not be provided. This alternative would remove the viaduct along the Seattle waterfront and would close and fill the Battery Street Tunnel after the bored tunnel is constructed. The southbound on-ramp to and northbound off-ramp from SR 99 would feed directly into a reconfigured Alaskan Way South. The northbound off-ramp would have a general-purpose lane and a peak hour transit-only lane to accommodate transit coming from south or West Seattle. The reconfigured Alaskan Way South would have three lanes in each direction up to South King Street. A new trail, called the City Side Trail, would replace the existing waterfront bicycle/pedestrian facility located on the east side of Alaskan Way South. A tunnel operations building would be constructed in the block bounded by South Dearborn Street and Alaskan Way South. Full northbound and southbound access to and from SR 99 would be provided near Harrison and Republican Streets and surface streets would be rebuilt and improved in the north portal area. Costs of implementing the Bored Tunnel Alternative are estimated at $1.9 billion based on completion of tunnel and portal improvements in 2015 and surface improvements in 2017. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The aging, structurally unsound viaduct would be replaced with up-to-date facilities capable of withstanding earthquakes and offering the capacity to maintain or improve mobility, safety, and accessibility for travelers and freight interests. Implementation would protect the integrity and viability of adjacent activities on the central waterfront and in downtown Seattle. Once the viaduct is removed, views to and from the waterfront would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require: partial or full acquisition of 11 commercial properties and 52 to 59 subsurface parcels; removal of three buildings and the relocation or displacement of an estimated 144 workers; removal of 570 parking spaces; and demolition of the existing viaduct and the Battery Street tunnel, both of which are eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at 48 of the 68 sites modeled for study. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft and first supplemental draft EISs, see 04-0469D, Volume 28, Number 4 and 06-0574D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100428, 141 pages (Oversized), Technical Reports--CD-ROM, October 22, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 13 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-04-01-DS2 KW - Demolition KW - Earthquakes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Parks KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133330?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.title=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 22, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). [Part 3 of 34] T2 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). AN - 873133258; 14698-8_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Alaskan Way Viaduct (State Route 99) between S. Royal Brougham Way and Roy Street in downtown Seattle, King County, Washington is proposed. Damage sustained by the viaduct during the February 2001Nisqually earthquake compromised its structural integrity. This past damage, along with the age, design, and location of the existing viaduct, makes it vulnerable to future strong earthquakes, and damage from these quakes could make the structure unusable. State Route 99 (SR 99) and Interstate 5 are the primary north-south limited access routes through downtown Seattle. Failure of the viaduct would create severe hardship for the city and the region, and could result in injury or death. The March 2004 draft EIS analyzed five build alternatives and a No Build Alternative. After further study and public input, the number of build alternatives was reduced to two, the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel and Elevated Structure alternatives, which were evaluated in the 2006 supplemental draft EIS. A new Bored Tunnel Alternative was proposed in 2009 along with complementary improvements including a restored seawall; a new waterfront surface street and connection from the waterfront to Western and Elliott Avenues; a waterfront promenade; transit enhancements; and a streetcar on First Avenue. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes the Bored Tunnel Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, and compares it to the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel, Elevated Structure, and No Build alternatives. The Bored Tunnel Alternative would replace SR 99 with a tunnel that would have two lanes in each direction. Southbound lanes would be located on the top portion of the tunnel, and the northbound lanes would be located on the bottom. Travel lanes would be 11 feet wide, with a two-foot-wide shoulder on one side and a six-foot-wide shoulder on the other side. Access to and from SR 99 would be provided via ramp connections at the south portal north of S. Royal Brougham Way and the north portal near Harrison and Republican Streets. Unlike the existing connections, ramps to and from Columbia and Seneca Streets or Elliott and Western Avenues would not be provided. This alternative would remove the viaduct along the Seattle waterfront and would close and fill the Battery Street Tunnel after the bored tunnel is constructed. The southbound on-ramp to and northbound off-ramp from SR 99 would feed directly into a reconfigured Alaskan Way South. The northbound off-ramp would have a general-purpose lane and a peak hour transit-only lane to accommodate transit coming from south or West Seattle. The reconfigured Alaskan Way South would have three lanes in each direction up to South King Street. A new trail, called the City Side Trail, would replace the existing waterfront bicycle/pedestrian facility located on the east side of Alaskan Way South. A tunnel operations building would be constructed in the block bounded by South Dearborn Street and Alaskan Way South. Full northbound and southbound access to and from SR 99 would be provided near Harrison and Republican Streets and surface streets would be rebuilt and improved in the north portal area. Costs of implementing the Bored Tunnel Alternative are estimated at $1.9 billion based on completion of tunnel and portal improvements in 2015 and surface improvements in 2017. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The aging, structurally unsound viaduct would be replaced with up-to-date facilities capable of withstanding earthquakes and offering the capacity to maintain or improve mobility, safety, and accessibility for travelers and freight interests. Implementation would protect the integrity and viability of adjacent activities on the central waterfront and in downtown Seattle. Once the viaduct is removed, views to and from the waterfront would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require: partial or full acquisition of 11 commercial properties and 52 to 59 subsurface parcels; removal of three buildings and the relocation or displacement of an estimated 144 workers; removal of 570 parking spaces; and demolition of the existing viaduct and the Battery Street tunnel, both of which are eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at 48 of the 68 sites modeled for study. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft and first supplemental draft EISs, see 04-0469D, Volume 28, Number 4 and 06-0574D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100428, 141 pages (Oversized), Technical Reports--CD-ROM, October 22, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-04-01-DS2 KW - Demolition KW - Earthquakes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Parks KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133258?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.title=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 22, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). [Part 2 of 34] T2 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). AN - 873133250; 14698-8_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Alaskan Way Viaduct (State Route 99) between S. Royal Brougham Way and Roy Street in downtown Seattle, King County, Washington is proposed. Damage sustained by the viaduct during the February 2001Nisqually earthquake compromised its structural integrity. This past damage, along with the age, design, and location of the existing viaduct, makes it vulnerable to future strong earthquakes, and damage from these quakes could make the structure unusable. State Route 99 (SR 99) and Interstate 5 are the primary north-south limited access routes through downtown Seattle. Failure of the viaduct would create severe hardship for the city and the region, and could result in injury or death. The March 2004 draft EIS analyzed five build alternatives and a No Build Alternative. After further study and public input, the number of build alternatives was reduced to two, the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel and Elevated Structure alternatives, which were evaluated in the 2006 supplemental draft EIS. A new Bored Tunnel Alternative was proposed in 2009 along with complementary improvements including a restored seawall; a new waterfront surface street and connection from the waterfront to Western and Elliott Avenues; a waterfront promenade; transit enhancements; and a streetcar on First Avenue. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes the Bored Tunnel Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, and compares it to the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel, Elevated Structure, and No Build alternatives. The Bored Tunnel Alternative would replace SR 99 with a tunnel that would have two lanes in each direction. Southbound lanes would be located on the top portion of the tunnel, and the northbound lanes would be located on the bottom. Travel lanes would be 11 feet wide, with a two-foot-wide shoulder on one side and a six-foot-wide shoulder on the other side. Access to and from SR 99 would be provided via ramp connections at the south portal north of S. Royal Brougham Way and the north portal near Harrison and Republican Streets. Unlike the existing connections, ramps to and from Columbia and Seneca Streets or Elliott and Western Avenues would not be provided. This alternative would remove the viaduct along the Seattle waterfront and would close and fill the Battery Street Tunnel after the bored tunnel is constructed. The southbound on-ramp to and northbound off-ramp from SR 99 would feed directly into a reconfigured Alaskan Way South. The northbound off-ramp would have a general-purpose lane and a peak hour transit-only lane to accommodate transit coming from south or West Seattle. The reconfigured Alaskan Way South would have three lanes in each direction up to South King Street. A new trail, called the City Side Trail, would replace the existing waterfront bicycle/pedestrian facility located on the east side of Alaskan Way South. A tunnel operations building would be constructed in the block bounded by South Dearborn Street and Alaskan Way South. Full northbound and southbound access to and from SR 99 would be provided near Harrison and Republican Streets and surface streets would be rebuilt and improved in the north portal area. Costs of implementing the Bored Tunnel Alternative are estimated at $1.9 billion based on completion of tunnel and portal improvements in 2015 and surface improvements in 2017. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The aging, structurally unsound viaduct would be replaced with up-to-date facilities capable of withstanding earthquakes and offering the capacity to maintain or improve mobility, safety, and accessibility for travelers and freight interests. Implementation would protect the integrity and viability of adjacent activities on the central waterfront and in downtown Seattle. Once the viaduct is removed, views to and from the waterfront would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require: partial or full acquisition of 11 commercial properties and 52 to 59 subsurface parcels; removal of three buildings and the relocation or displacement of an estimated 144 workers; removal of 570 parking spaces; and demolition of the existing viaduct and the Battery Street tunnel, both of which are eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at 48 of the 68 sites modeled for study. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft and first supplemental draft EISs, see 04-0469D, Volume 28, Number 4 and 06-0574D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100428, 141 pages (Oversized), Technical Reports--CD-ROM, October 22, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-04-01-DS2 KW - Demolition KW - Earthquakes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Parks KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133250?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.title=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 22, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). [Part 1 of 34] T2 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). AN - 873133246; 14698-8_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Alaskan Way Viaduct (State Route 99) between S. Royal Brougham Way and Roy Street in downtown Seattle, King County, Washington is proposed. Damage sustained by the viaduct during the February 2001Nisqually earthquake compromised its structural integrity. This past damage, along with the age, design, and location of the existing viaduct, makes it vulnerable to future strong earthquakes, and damage from these quakes could make the structure unusable. State Route 99 (SR 99) and Interstate 5 are the primary north-south limited access routes through downtown Seattle. Failure of the viaduct would create severe hardship for the city and the region, and could result in injury or death. The March 2004 draft EIS analyzed five build alternatives and a No Build Alternative. After further study and public input, the number of build alternatives was reduced to two, the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel and Elevated Structure alternatives, which were evaluated in the 2006 supplemental draft EIS. A new Bored Tunnel Alternative was proposed in 2009 along with complementary improvements including a restored seawall; a new waterfront surface street and connection from the waterfront to Western and Elliott Avenues; a waterfront promenade; transit enhancements; and a streetcar on First Avenue. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes the Bored Tunnel Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, and compares it to the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel, Elevated Structure, and No Build alternatives. The Bored Tunnel Alternative would replace SR 99 with a tunnel that would have two lanes in each direction. Southbound lanes would be located on the top portion of the tunnel, and the northbound lanes would be located on the bottom. Travel lanes would be 11 feet wide, with a two-foot-wide shoulder on one side and a six-foot-wide shoulder on the other side. Access to and from SR 99 would be provided via ramp connections at the south portal north of S. Royal Brougham Way and the north portal near Harrison and Republican Streets. Unlike the existing connections, ramps to and from Columbia and Seneca Streets or Elliott and Western Avenues would not be provided. This alternative would remove the viaduct along the Seattle waterfront and would close and fill the Battery Street Tunnel after the bored tunnel is constructed. The southbound on-ramp to and northbound off-ramp from SR 99 would feed directly into a reconfigured Alaskan Way South. The northbound off-ramp would have a general-purpose lane and a peak hour transit-only lane to accommodate transit coming from south or West Seattle. The reconfigured Alaskan Way South would have three lanes in each direction up to South King Street. A new trail, called the City Side Trail, would replace the existing waterfront bicycle/pedestrian facility located on the east side of Alaskan Way South. A tunnel operations building would be constructed in the block bounded by South Dearborn Street and Alaskan Way South. Full northbound and southbound access to and from SR 99 would be provided near Harrison and Republican Streets and surface streets would be rebuilt and improved in the north portal area. Costs of implementing the Bored Tunnel Alternative are estimated at $1.9 billion based on completion of tunnel and portal improvements in 2015 and surface improvements in 2017. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The aging, structurally unsound viaduct would be replaced with up-to-date facilities capable of withstanding earthquakes and offering the capacity to maintain or improve mobility, safety, and accessibility for travelers and freight interests. Implementation would protect the integrity and viability of adjacent activities on the central waterfront and in downtown Seattle. Once the viaduct is removed, views to and from the waterfront would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require: partial or full acquisition of 11 commercial properties and 52 to 59 subsurface parcels; removal of three buildings and the relocation or displacement of an estimated 144 workers; removal of 570 parking spaces; and demolition of the existing viaduct and the Battery Street tunnel, both of which are eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at 48 of the 68 sites modeled for study. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft and first supplemental draft EISs, see 04-0469D, Volume 28, Number 4 and 06-0574D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100428, 141 pages (Oversized), Technical Reports--CD-ROM, October 22, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-04-01-DS2 KW - Demolition KW - Earthquakes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Parks KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133246?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.title=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 22, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). [Part 34 of 34] T2 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). AN - 873132564; 14698-8_0034 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Alaskan Way Viaduct (State Route 99) between S. Royal Brougham Way and Roy Street in downtown Seattle, King County, Washington is proposed. Damage sustained by the viaduct during the February 2001Nisqually earthquake compromised its structural integrity. This past damage, along with the age, design, and location of the existing viaduct, makes it vulnerable to future strong earthquakes, and damage from these quakes could make the structure unusable. State Route 99 (SR 99) and Interstate 5 are the primary north-south limited access routes through downtown Seattle. Failure of the viaduct would create severe hardship for the city and the region, and could result in injury or death. The March 2004 draft EIS analyzed five build alternatives and a No Build Alternative. After further study and public input, the number of build alternatives was reduced to two, the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel and Elevated Structure alternatives, which were evaluated in the 2006 supplemental draft EIS. A new Bored Tunnel Alternative was proposed in 2009 along with complementary improvements including a restored seawall; a new waterfront surface street and connection from the waterfront to Western and Elliott Avenues; a waterfront promenade; transit enhancements; and a streetcar on First Avenue. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes the Bored Tunnel Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, and compares it to the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel, Elevated Structure, and No Build alternatives. The Bored Tunnel Alternative would replace SR 99 with a tunnel that would have two lanes in each direction. Southbound lanes would be located on the top portion of the tunnel, and the northbound lanes would be located on the bottom. Travel lanes would be 11 feet wide, with a two-foot-wide shoulder on one side and a six-foot-wide shoulder on the other side. Access to and from SR 99 would be provided via ramp connections at the south portal north of S. Royal Brougham Way and the north portal near Harrison and Republican Streets. Unlike the existing connections, ramps to and from Columbia and Seneca Streets or Elliott and Western Avenues would not be provided. This alternative would remove the viaduct along the Seattle waterfront and would close and fill the Battery Street Tunnel after the bored tunnel is constructed. The southbound on-ramp to and northbound off-ramp from SR 99 would feed directly into a reconfigured Alaskan Way South. The northbound off-ramp would have a general-purpose lane and a peak hour transit-only lane to accommodate transit coming from south or West Seattle. The reconfigured Alaskan Way South would have three lanes in each direction up to South King Street. A new trail, called the City Side Trail, would replace the existing waterfront bicycle/pedestrian facility located on the east side of Alaskan Way South. A tunnel operations building would be constructed in the block bounded by South Dearborn Street and Alaskan Way South. Full northbound and southbound access to and from SR 99 would be provided near Harrison and Republican Streets and surface streets would be rebuilt and improved in the north portal area. Costs of implementing the Bored Tunnel Alternative are estimated at $1.9 billion based on completion of tunnel and portal improvements in 2015 and surface improvements in 2017. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The aging, structurally unsound viaduct would be replaced with up-to-date facilities capable of withstanding earthquakes and offering the capacity to maintain or improve mobility, safety, and accessibility for travelers and freight interests. Implementation would protect the integrity and viability of adjacent activities on the central waterfront and in downtown Seattle. Once the viaduct is removed, views to and from the waterfront would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require: partial or full acquisition of 11 commercial properties and 52 to 59 subsurface parcels; removal of three buildings and the relocation or displacement of an estimated 144 workers; removal of 570 parking spaces; and demolition of the existing viaduct and the Battery Street tunnel, both of which are eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at 48 of the 68 sites modeled for study. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft and first supplemental draft EISs, see 04-0469D, Volume 28, Number 4 and 06-0574D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100428, 141 pages (Oversized), Technical Reports--CD-ROM, October 22, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 34 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-04-01-DS2 KW - Demolition KW - Earthquakes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Parks KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132564?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.title=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 22, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). [Part 33 of 34] T2 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). AN - 873132552; 14698-8_0033 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Alaskan Way Viaduct (State Route 99) between S. Royal Brougham Way and Roy Street in downtown Seattle, King County, Washington is proposed. Damage sustained by the viaduct during the February 2001Nisqually earthquake compromised its structural integrity. This past damage, along with the age, design, and location of the existing viaduct, makes it vulnerable to future strong earthquakes, and damage from these quakes could make the structure unusable. State Route 99 (SR 99) and Interstate 5 are the primary north-south limited access routes through downtown Seattle. Failure of the viaduct would create severe hardship for the city and the region, and could result in injury or death. The March 2004 draft EIS analyzed five build alternatives and a No Build Alternative. After further study and public input, the number of build alternatives was reduced to two, the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel and Elevated Structure alternatives, which were evaluated in the 2006 supplemental draft EIS. A new Bored Tunnel Alternative was proposed in 2009 along with complementary improvements including a restored seawall; a new waterfront surface street and connection from the waterfront to Western and Elliott Avenues; a waterfront promenade; transit enhancements; and a streetcar on First Avenue. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes the Bored Tunnel Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, and compares it to the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel, Elevated Structure, and No Build alternatives. The Bored Tunnel Alternative would replace SR 99 with a tunnel that would have two lanes in each direction. Southbound lanes would be located on the top portion of the tunnel, and the northbound lanes would be located on the bottom. Travel lanes would be 11 feet wide, with a two-foot-wide shoulder on one side and a six-foot-wide shoulder on the other side. Access to and from SR 99 would be provided via ramp connections at the south portal north of S. Royal Brougham Way and the north portal near Harrison and Republican Streets. Unlike the existing connections, ramps to and from Columbia and Seneca Streets or Elliott and Western Avenues would not be provided. This alternative would remove the viaduct along the Seattle waterfront and would close and fill the Battery Street Tunnel after the bored tunnel is constructed. The southbound on-ramp to and northbound off-ramp from SR 99 would feed directly into a reconfigured Alaskan Way South. The northbound off-ramp would have a general-purpose lane and a peak hour transit-only lane to accommodate transit coming from south or West Seattle. The reconfigured Alaskan Way South would have three lanes in each direction up to South King Street. A new trail, called the City Side Trail, would replace the existing waterfront bicycle/pedestrian facility located on the east side of Alaskan Way South. A tunnel operations building would be constructed in the block bounded by South Dearborn Street and Alaskan Way South. Full northbound and southbound access to and from SR 99 would be provided near Harrison and Republican Streets and surface streets would be rebuilt and improved in the north portal area. Costs of implementing the Bored Tunnel Alternative are estimated at $1.9 billion based on completion of tunnel and portal improvements in 2015 and surface improvements in 2017. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The aging, structurally unsound viaduct would be replaced with up-to-date facilities capable of withstanding earthquakes and offering the capacity to maintain or improve mobility, safety, and accessibility for travelers and freight interests. Implementation would protect the integrity and viability of adjacent activities on the central waterfront and in downtown Seattle. Once the viaduct is removed, views to and from the waterfront would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require: partial or full acquisition of 11 commercial properties and 52 to 59 subsurface parcels; removal of three buildings and the relocation or displacement of an estimated 144 workers; removal of 570 parking spaces; and demolition of the existing viaduct and the Battery Street tunnel, both of which are eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at 48 of the 68 sites modeled for study. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft and first supplemental draft EISs, see 04-0469D, Volume 28, Number 4 and 06-0574D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100428, 141 pages (Oversized), Technical Reports--CD-ROM, October 22, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 33 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-04-01-DS2 KW - Demolition KW - Earthquakes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Parks KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132552?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.title=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 22, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). [Part 31 of 34] T2 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). AN - 873132520; 14698-8_0031 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Alaskan Way Viaduct (State Route 99) between S. Royal Brougham Way and Roy Street in downtown Seattle, King County, Washington is proposed. Damage sustained by the viaduct during the February 2001Nisqually earthquake compromised its structural integrity. This past damage, along with the age, design, and location of the existing viaduct, makes it vulnerable to future strong earthquakes, and damage from these quakes could make the structure unusable. State Route 99 (SR 99) and Interstate 5 are the primary north-south limited access routes through downtown Seattle. Failure of the viaduct would create severe hardship for the city and the region, and could result in injury or death. The March 2004 draft EIS analyzed five build alternatives and a No Build Alternative. After further study and public input, the number of build alternatives was reduced to two, the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel and Elevated Structure alternatives, which were evaluated in the 2006 supplemental draft EIS. A new Bored Tunnel Alternative was proposed in 2009 along with complementary improvements including a restored seawall; a new waterfront surface street and connection from the waterfront to Western and Elliott Avenues; a waterfront promenade; transit enhancements; and a streetcar on First Avenue. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes the Bored Tunnel Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, and compares it to the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel, Elevated Structure, and No Build alternatives. The Bored Tunnel Alternative would replace SR 99 with a tunnel that would have two lanes in each direction. Southbound lanes would be located on the top portion of the tunnel, and the northbound lanes would be located on the bottom. Travel lanes would be 11 feet wide, with a two-foot-wide shoulder on one side and a six-foot-wide shoulder on the other side. Access to and from SR 99 would be provided via ramp connections at the south portal north of S. Royal Brougham Way and the north portal near Harrison and Republican Streets. Unlike the existing connections, ramps to and from Columbia and Seneca Streets or Elliott and Western Avenues would not be provided. This alternative would remove the viaduct along the Seattle waterfront and would close and fill the Battery Street Tunnel after the bored tunnel is constructed. The southbound on-ramp to and northbound off-ramp from SR 99 would feed directly into a reconfigured Alaskan Way South. The northbound off-ramp would have a general-purpose lane and a peak hour transit-only lane to accommodate transit coming from south or West Seattle. The reconfigured Alaskan Way South would have three lanes in each direction up to South King Street. A new trail, called the City Side Trail, would replace the existing waterfront bicycle/pedestrian facility located on the east side of Alaskan Way South. A tunnel operations building would be constructed in the block bounded by South Dearborn Street and Alaskan Way South. Full northbound and southbound access to and from SR 99 would be provided near Harrison and Republican Streets and surface streets would be rebuilt and improved in the north portal area. Costs of implementing the Bored Tunnel Alternative are estimated at $1.9 billion based on completion of tunnel and portal improvements in 2015 and surface improvements in 2017. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The aging, structurally unsound viaduct would be replaced with up-to-date facilities capable of withstanding earthquakes and offering the capacity to maintain or improve mobility, safety, and accessibility for travelers and freight interests. Implementation would protect the integrity and viability of adjacent activities on the central waterfront and in downtown Seattle. Once the viaduct is removed, views to and from the waterfront would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require: partial or full acquisition of 11 commercial properties and 52 to 59 subsurface parcels; removal of three buildings and the relocation or displacement of an estimated 144 workers; removal of 570 parking spaces; and demolition of the existing viaduct and the Battery Street tunnel, both of which are eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at 48 of the 68 sites modeled for study. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft and first supplemental draft EISs, see 04-0469D, Volume 28, Number 4 and 06-0574D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100428, 141 pages (Oversized), Technical Reports--CD-ROM, October 22, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 31 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-04-01-DS2 KW - Demolition KW - Earthquakes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Parks KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132520?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.title=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 22, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). [Part 7 of 34] T2 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). AN - 873132495; 14698-8_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Alaskan Way Viaduct (State Route 99) between S. Royal Brougham Way and Roy Street in downtown Seattle, King County, Washington is proposed. Damage sustained by the viaduct during the February 2001Nisqually earthquake compromised its structural integrity. This past damage, along with the age, design, and location of the existing viaduct, makes it vulnerable to future strong earthquakes, and damage from these quakes could make the structure unusable. State Route 99 (SR 99) and Interstate 5 are the primary north-south limited access routes through downtown Seattle. Failure of the viaduct would create severe hardship for the city and the region, and could result in injury or death. The March 2004 draft EIS analyzed five build alternatives and a No Build Alternative. After further study and public input, the number of build alternatives was reduced to two, the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel and Elevated Structure alternatives, which were evaluated in the 2006 supplemental draft EIS. A new Bored Tunnel Alternative was proposed in 2009 along with complementary improvements including a restored seawall; a new waterfront surface street and connection from the waterfront to Western and Elliott Avenues; a waterfront promenade; transit enhancements; and a streetcar on First Avenue. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes the Bored Tunnel Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, and compares it to the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel, Elevated Structure, and No Build alternatives. The Bored Tunnel Alternative would replace SR 99 with a tunnel that would have two lanes in each direction. Southbound lanes would be located on the top portion of the tunnel, and the northbound lanes would be located on the bottom. Travel lanes would be 11 feet wide, with a two-foot-wide shoulder on one side and a six-foot-wide shoulder on the other side. Access to and from SR 99 would be provided via ramp connections at the south portal north of S. Royal Brougham Way and the north portal near Harrison and Republican Streets. Unlike the existing connections, ramps to and from Columbia and Seneca Streets or Elliott and Western Avenues would not be provided. This alternative would remove the viaduct along the Seattle waterfront and would close and fill the Battery Street Tunnel after the bored tunnel is constructed. The southbound on-ramp to and northbound off-ramp from SR 99 would feed directly into a reconfigured Alaskan Way South. The northbound off-ramp would have a general-purpose lane and a peak hour transit-only lane to accommodate transit coming from south or West Seattle. The reconfigured Alaskan Way South would have three lanes in each direction up to South King Street. A new trail, called the City Side Trail, would replace the existing waterfront bicycle/pedestrian facility located on the east side of Alaskan Way South. A tunnel operations building would be constructed in the block bounded by South Dearborn Street and Alaskan Way South. Full northbound and southbound access to and from SR 99 would be provided near Harrison and Republican Streets and surface streets would be rebuilt and improved in the north portal area. Costs of implementing the Bored Tunnel Alternative are estimated at $1.9 billion based on completion of tunnel and portal improvements in 2015 and surface improvements in 2017. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The aging, structurally unsound viaduct would be replaced with up-to-date facilities capable of withstanding earthquakes and offering the capacity to maintain or improve mobility, safety, and accessibility for travelers and freight interests. Implementation would protect the integrity and viability of adjacent activities on the central waterfront and in downtown Seattle. Once the viaduct is removed, views to and from the waterfront would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require: partial or full acquisition of 11 commercial properties and 52 to 59 subsurface parcels; removal of three buildings and the relocation or displacement of an estimated 144 workers; removal of 570 parking spaces; and demolition of the existing viaduct and the Battery Street tunnel, both of which are eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at 48 of the 68 sites modeled for study. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft and first supplemental draft EISs, see 04-0469D, Volume 28, Number 4 and 06-0574D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100428, 141 pages (Oversized), Technical Reports--CD-ROM, October 22, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-04-01-DS2 KW - Demolition KW - Earthquakes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Parks KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132495?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.title=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 22, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). [Part 20 of 34] T2 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). AN - 873130351; 14698-8_0020 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Alaskan Way Viaduct (State Route 99) between S. Royal Brougham Way and Roy Street in downtown Seattle, King County, Washington is proposed. Damage sustained by the viaduct during the February 2001Nisqually earthquake compromised its structural integrity. This past damage, along with the age, design, and location of the existing viaduct, makes it vulnerable to future strong earthquakes, and damage from these quakes could make the structure unusable. State Route 99 (SR 99) and Interstate 5 are the primary north-south limited access routes through downtown Seattle. Failure of the viaduct would create severe hardship for the city and the region, and could result in injury or death. The March 2004 draft EIS analyzed five build alternatives and a No Build Alternative. After further study and public input, the number of build alternatives was reduced to two, the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel and Elevated Structure alternatives, which were evaluated in the 2006 supplemental draft EIS. A new Bored Tunnel Alternative was proposed in 2009 along with complementary improvements including a restored seawall; a new waterfront surface street and connection from the waterfront to Western and Elliott Avenues; a waterfront promenade; transit enhancements; and a streetcar on First Avenue. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes the Bored Tunnel Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, and compares it to the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel, Elevated Structure, and No Build alternatives. The Bored Tunnel Alternative would replace SR 99 with a tunnel that would have two lanes in each direction. Southbound lanes would be located on the top portion of the tunnel, and the northbound lanes would be located on the bottom. Travel lanes would be 11 feet wide, with a two-foot-wide shoulder on one side and a six-foot-wide shoulder on the other side. Access to and from SR 99 would be provided via ramp connections at the south portal north of S. Royal Brougham Way and the north portal near Harrison and Republican Streets. Unlike the existing connections, ramps to and from Columbia and Seneca Streets or Elliott and Western Avenues would not be provided. This alternative would remove the viaduct along the Seattle waterfront and would close and fill the Battery Street Tunnel after the bored tunnel is constructed. The southbound on-ramp to and northbound off-ramp from SR 99 would feed directly into a reconfigured Alaskan Way South. The northbound off-ramp would have a general-purpose lane and a peak hour transit-only lane to accommodate transit coming from south or West Seattle. The reconfigured Alaskan Way South would have three lanes in each direction up to South King Street. A new trail, called the City Side Trail, would replace the existing waterfront bicycle/pedestrian facility located on the east side of Alaskan Way South. A tunnel operations building would be constructed in the block bounded by South Dearborn Street and Alaskan Way South. Full northbound and southbound access to and from SR 99 would be provided near Harrison and Republican Streets and surface streets would be rebuilt and improved in the north portal area. Costs of implementing the Bored Tunnel Alternative are estimated at $1.9 billion based on completion of tunnel and portal improvements in 2015 and surface improvements in 2017. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The aging, structurally unsound viaduct would be replaced with up-to-date facilities capable of withstanding earthquakes and offering the capacity to maintain or improve mobility, safety, and accessibility for travelers and freight interests. Implementation would protect the integrity and viability of adjacent activities on the central waterfront and in downtown Seattle. Once the viaduct is removed, views to and from the waterfront would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require: partial or full acquisition of 11 commercial properties and 52 to 59 subsurface parcels; removal of three buildings and the relocation or displacement of an estimated 144 workers; removal of 570 parking spaces; and demolition of the existing viaduct and the Battery Street tunnel, both of which are eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at 48 of the 68 sites modeled for study. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft and first supplemental draft EISs, see 04-0469D, Volume 28, Number 4 and 06-0574D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100428, 141 pages (Oversized), Technical Reports--CD-ROM, October 22, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 20 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-04-01-DS2 KW - Demolition KW - Earthquakes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Parks KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130351?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.title=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 22, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). [Part 18 of 34] T2 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). AN - 873130317; 14698-8_0018 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Alaskan Way Viaduct (State Route 99) between S. Royal Brougham Way and Roy Street in downtown Seattle, King County, Washington is proposed. Damage sustained by the viaduct during the February 2001Nisqually earthquake compromised its structural integrity. This past damage, along with the age, design, and location of the existing viaduct, makes it vulnerable to future strong earthquakes, and damage from these quakes could make the structure unusable. State Route 99 (SR 99) and Interstate 5 are the primary north-south limited access routes through downtown Seattle. Failure of the viaduct would create severe hardship for the city and the region, and could result in injury or death. The March 2004 draft EIS analyzed five build alternatives and a No Build Alternative. After further study and public input, the number of build alternatives was reduced to two, the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel and Elevated Structure alternatives, which were evaluated in the 2006 supplemental draft EIS. A new Bored Tunnel Alternative was proposed in 2009 along with complementary improvements including a restored seawall; a new waterfront surface street and connection from the waterfront to Western and Elliott Avenues; a waterfront promenade; transit enhancements; and a streetcar on First Avenue. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes the Bored Tunnel Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, and compares it to the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel, Elevated Structure, and No Build alternatives. The Bored Tunnel Alternative would replace SR 99 with a tunnel that would have two lanes in each direction. Southbound lanes would be located on the top portion of the tunnel, and the northbound lanes would be located on the bottom. Travel lanes would be 11 feet wide, with a two-foot-wide shoulder on one side and a six-foot-wide shoulder on the other side. Access to and from SR 99 would be provided via ramp connections at the south portal north of S. Royal Brougham Way and the north portal near Harrison and Republican Streets. Unlike the existing connections, ramps to and from Columbia and Seneca Streets or Elliott and Western Avenues would not be provided. This alternative would remove the viaduct along the Seattle waterfront and would close and fill the Battery Street Tunnel after the bored tunnel is constructed. The southbound on-ramp to and northbound off-ramp from SR 99 would feed directly into a reconfigured Alaskan Way South. The northbound off-ramp would have a general-purpose lane and a peak hour transit-only lane to accommodate transit coming from south or West Seattle. The reconfigured Alaskan Way South would have three lanes in each direction up to South King Street. A new trail, called the City Side Trail, would replace the existing waterfront bicycle/pedestrian facility located on the east side of Alaskan Way South. A tunnel operations building would be constructed in the block bounded by South Dearborn Street and Alaskan Way South. Full northbound and southbound access to and from SR 99 would be provided near Harrison and Republican Streets and surface streets would be rebuilt and improved in the north portal area. Costs of implementing the Bored Tunnel Alternative are estimated at $1.9 billion based on completion of tunnel and portal improvements in 2015 and surface improvements in 2017. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The aging, structurally unsound viaduct would be replaced with up-to-date facilities capable of withstanding earthquakes and offering the capacity to maintain or improve mobility, safety, and accessibility for travelers and freight interests. Implementation would protect the integrity and viability of adjacent activities on the central waterfront and in downtown Seattle. Once the viaduct is removed, views to and from the waterfront would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require: partial or full acquisition of 11 commercial properties and 52 to 59 subsurface parcels; removal of three buildings and the relocation or displacement of an estimated 144 workers; removal of 570 parking spaces; and demolition of the existing viaduct and the Battery Street tunnel, both of which are eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at 48 of the 68 sites modeled for study. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft and first supplemental draft EISs, see 04-0469D, Volume 28, Number 4 and 06-0574D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100428, 141 pages (Oversized), Technical Reports--CD-ROM, October 22, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 18 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-04-01-DS2 KW - Demolition KW - Earthquakes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Parks KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130317?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.title=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 22, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). [Part 17 of 34] T2 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). AN - 873130278; 14698-8_0017 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Alaskan Way Viaduct (State Route 99) between S. Royal Brougham Way and Roy Street in downtown Seattle, King County, Washington is proposed. Damage sustained by the viaduct during the February 2001Nisqually earthquake compromised its structural integrity. This past damage, along with the age, design, and location of the existing viaduct, makes it vulnerable to future strong earthquakes, and damage from these quakes could make the structure unusable. State Route 99 (SR 99) and Interstate 5 are the primary north-south limited access routes through downtown Seattle. Failure of the viaduct would create severe hardship for the city and the region, and could result in injury or death. The March 2004 draft EIS analyzed five build alternatives and a No Build Alternative. After further study and public input, the number of build alternatives was reduced to two, the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel and Elevated Structure alternatives, which were evaluated in the 2006 supplemental draft EIS. A new Bored Tunnel Alternative was proposed in 2009 along with complementary improvements including a restored seawall; a new waterfront surface street and connection from the waterfront to Western and Elliott Avenues; a waterfront promenade; transit enhancements; and a streetcar on First Avenue. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes the Bored Tunnel Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, and compares it to the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel, Elevated Structure, and No Build alternatives. The Bored Tunnel Alternative would replace SR 99 with a tunnel that would have two lanes in each direction. Southbound lanes would be located on the top portion of the tunnel, and the northbound lanes would be located on the bottom. Travel lanes would be 11 feet wide, with a two-foot-wide shoulder on one side and a six-foot-wide shoulder on the other side. Access to and from SR 99 would be provided via ramp connections at the south portal north of S. Royal Brougham Way and the north portal near Harrison and Republican Streets. Unlike the existing connections, ramps to and from Columbia and Seneca Streets or Elliott and Western Avenues would not be provided. This alternative would remove the viaduct along the Seattle waterfront and would close and fill the Battery Street Tunnel after the bored tunnel is constructed. The southbound on-ramp to and northbound off-ramp from SR 99 would feed directly into a reconfigured Alaskan Way South. The northbound off-ramp would have a general-purpose lane and a peak hour transit-only lane to accommodate transit coming from south or West Seattle. The reconfigured Alaskan Way South would have three lanes in each direction up to South King Street. A new trail, called the City Side Trail, would replace the existing waterfront bicycle/pedestrian facility located on the east side of Alaskan Way South. A tunnel operations building would be constructed in the block bounded by South Dearborn Street and Alaskan Way South. Full northbound and southbound access to and from SR 99 would be provided near Harrison and Republican Streets and surface streets would be rebuilt and improved in the north portal area. Costs of implementing the Bored Tunnel Alternative are estimated at $1.9 billion based on completion of tunnel and portal improvements in 2015 and surface improvements in 2017. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The aging, structurally unsound viaduct would be replaced with up-to-date facilities capable of withstanding earthquakes and offering the capacity to maintain or improve mobility, safety, and accessibility for travelers and freight interests. Implementation would protect the integrity and viability of adjacent activities on the central waterfront and in downtown Seattle. Once the viaduct is removed, views to and from the waterfront would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require: partial or full acquisition of 11 commercial properties and 52 to 59 subsurface parcels; removal of three buildings and the relocation or displacement of an estimated 144 workers; removal of 570 parking spaces; and demolition of the existing viaduct and the Battery Street tunnel, both of which are eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at 48 of the 68 sites modeled for study. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft and first supplemental draft EISs, see 04-0469D, Volume 28, Number 4 and 06-0574D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100428, 141 pages (Oversized), Technical Reports--CD-ROM, October 22, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 17 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-04-01-DS2 KW - Demolition KW - Earthquakes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Parks KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130278?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.title=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 22, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). [Part 30 of 34] T2 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). AN - 873130239; 14698-8_0030 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Alaskan Way Viaduct (State Route 99) between S. Royal Brougham Way and Roy Street in downtown Seattle, King County, Washington is proposed. Damage sustained by the viaduct during the February 2001Nisqually earthquake compromised its structural integrity. This past damage, along with the age, design, and location of the existing viaduct, makes it vulnerable to future strong earthquakes, and damage from these quakes could make the structure unusable. State Route 99 (SR 99) and Interstate 5 are the primary north-south limited access routes through downtown Seattle. Failure of the viaduct would create severe hardship for the city and the region, and could result in injury or death. The March 2004 draft EIS analyzed five build alternatives and a No Build Alternative. After further study and public input, the number of build alternatives was reduced to two, the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel and Elevated Structure alternatives, which were evaluated in the 2006 supplemental draft EIS. A new Bored Tunnel Alternative was proposed in 2009 along with complementary improvements including a restored seawall; a new waterfront surface street and connection from the waterfront to Western and Elliott Avenues; a waterfront promenade; transit enhancements; and a streetcar on First Avenue. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes the Bored Tunnel Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, and compares it to the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel, Elevated Structure, and No Build alternatives. The Bored Tunnel Alternative would replace SR 99 with a tunnel that would have two lanes in each direction. Southbound lanes would be located on the top portion of the tunnel, and the northbound lanes would be located on the bottom. Travel lanes would be 11 feet wide, with a two-foot-wide shoulder on one side and a six-foot-wide shoulder on the other side. Access to and from SR 99 would be provided via ramp connections at the south portal north of S. Royal Brougham Way and the north portal near Harrison and Republican Streets. Unlike the existing connections, ramps to and from Columbia and Seneca Streets or Elliott and Western Avenues would not be provided. This alternative would remove the viaduct along the Seattle waterfront and would close and fill the Battery Street Tunnel after the bored tunnel is constructed. The southbound on-ramp to and northbound off-ramp from SR 99 would feed directly into a reconfigured Alaskan Way South. The northbound off-ramp would have a general-purpose lane and a peak hour transit-only lane to accommodate transit coming from south or West Seattle. The reconfigured Alaskan Way South would have three lanes in each direction up to South King Street. A new trail, called the City Side Trail, would replace the existing waterfront bicycle/pedestrian facility located on the east side of Alaskan Way South. A tunnel operations building would be constructed in the block bounded by South Dearborn Street and Alaskan Way South. Full northbound and southbound access to and from SR 99 would be provided near Harrison and Republican Streets and surface streets would be rebuilt and improved in the north portal area. Costs of implementing the Bored Tunnel Alternative are estimated at $1.9 billion based on completion of tunnel and portal improvements in 2015 and surface improvements in 2017. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The aging, structurally unsound viaduct would be replaced with up-to-date facilities capable of withstanding earthquakes and offering the capacity to maintain or improve mobility, safety, and accessibility for travelers and freight interests. Implementation would protect the integrity and viability of adjacent activities on the central waterfront and in downtown Seattle. Once the viaduct is removed, views to and from the waterfront would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require: partial or full acquisition of 11 commercial properties and 52 to 59 subsurface parcels; removal of three buildings and the relocation or displacement of an estimated 144 workers; removal of 570 parking spaces; and demolition of the existing viaduct and the Battery Street tunnel, both of which are eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at 48 of the 68 sites modeled for study. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft and first supplemental draft EISs, see 04-0469D, Volume 28, Number 4 and 06-0574D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100428, 141 pages (Oversized), Technical Reports--CD-ROM, October 22, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 30 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-04-01-DS2 KW - Demolition KW - Earthquakes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Parks KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130239?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.title=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 22, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT (STATE ROUTE 99) REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON (SECOND DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). AN - 818791516; 14698 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Alaskan Way Viaduct (State Route 99) between S. Royal Brougham Way and Roy Street in downtown Seattle, King County, Washington is proposed. Damage sustained by the viaduct during the February 2001Nisqually earthquake compromised its structural integrity. This past damage, along with the age, design, and location of the existing viaduct, makes it vulnerable to future strong earthquakes, and damage from these quakes could make the structure unusable. State Route 99 (SR 99) and Interstate 5 are the primary north-south limited access routes through downtown Seattle. Failure of the viaduct would create severe hardship for the city and the region, and could result in injury or death. The March 2004 draft EIS analyzed five build alternatives and a No Build Alternative. After further study and public input, the number of build alternatives was reduced to two, the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel and Elevated Structure alternatives, which were evaluated in the 2006 supplemental draft EIS. A new Bored Tunnel Alternative was proposed in 2009 along with complementary improvements including a restored seawall; a new waterfront surface street and connection from the waterfront to Western and Elliott Avenues; a waterfront promenade; transit enhancements; and a streetcar on First Avenue. This supplemental draft EIS analyzes the Bored Tunnel Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, and compares it to the Cut-and-Cover Tunnel, Elevated Structure, and No Build alternatives. The Bored Tunnel Alternative would replace SR 99 with a tunnel that would have two lanes in each direction. Southbound lanes would be located on the top portion of the tunnel, and the northbound lanes would be located on the bottom. Travel lanes would be 11 feet wide, with a two-foot-wide shoulder on one side and a six-foot-wide shoulder on the other side. Access to and from SR 99 would be provided via ramp connections at the south portal north of S. Royal Brougham Way and the north portal near Harrison and Republican Streets. Unlike the existing connections, ramps to and from Columbia and Seneca Streets or Elliott and Western Avenues would not be provided. This alternative would remove the viaduct along the Seattle waterfront and would close and fill the Battery Street Tunnel after the bored tunnel is constructed. The southbound on-ramp to and northbound off-ramp from SR 99 would feed directly into a reconfigured Alaskan Way South. The northbound off-ramp would have a general-purpose lane and a peak hour transit-only lane to accommodate transit coming from south or West Seattle. The reconfigured Alaskan Way South would have three lanes in each direction up to South King Street. A new trail, called the City Side Trail, would replace the existing waterfront bicycle/pedestrian facility located on the east side of Alaskan Way South. A tunnel operations building would be constructed in the block bounded by South Dearborn Street and Alaskan Way South. Full northbound and southbound access to and from SR 99 would be provided near Harrison and Republican Streets and surface streets would be rebuilt and improved in the north portal area. Costs of implementing the Bored Tunnel Alternative are estimated at $1.9 billion based on completion of tunnel and portal improvements in 2015 and surface improvements in 2017. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The aging, structurally unsound viaduct would be replaced with up-to-date facilities capable of withstanding earthquakes and offering the capacity to maintain or improve mobility, safety, and accessibility for travelers and freight interests. Implementation would protect the integrity and viability of adjacent activities on the central waterfront and in downtown Seattle. Once the viaduct is removed, views to and from the waterfront would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require: partial or full acquisition of 11 commercial properties and 52 to 59 subsurface parcels; removal of three buildings and the relocation or displacement of an estimated 144 workers; removal of 570 parking spaces; and demolition of the existing viaduct and the Battery Street tunnel, both of which are eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at 48 of the 68 sites modeled for study. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft and first supplemental draft EISs, see 04-0469D, Volume 28, Number 4 and 06-0574D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100428, 141 pages (Oversized), Technical Reports--CD-ROM, October 22, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-04-01-DS2 KW - Demolition KW - Earthquakes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Parks KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/818791516?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.title=ALASKAN+WAY+VIADUCT+%28STATE+ROUTE+99%29+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SEATTLE%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SECOND+DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 22, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 46 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133513; 14689-9_0046 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 46 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133513?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 38 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133507; 14689-9_0038 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 38 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133507?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 37 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133499; 14689-9_0037 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 37 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133499?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 36 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133494; 14689-9_0036 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 36 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133494?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 35 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133491; 14689-9_0035 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 35 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133491?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 34 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133485; 14689-9_0034 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 34 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133485?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 29 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133478; 14689-9_0029 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 29 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133478?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 28 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133473; 14689-9_0028 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 28 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133473?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 23 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133469; 14689-9_0023 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 23 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133469?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 22 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133464; 14689-9_0022 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 22 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133464?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 21 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133460; 14689-9_0021 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 21 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133460?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 20 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133456; 14689-9_0020 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 20 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133456?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 19 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133452; 14689-9_0019 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 19 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133452?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 14 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133447; 14689-9_0014 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 14 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133447?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 13 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133442; 14689-9_0013 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 13 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133442?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 12 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133439; 14689-9_0012 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 12 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133439?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 11 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133435; 14689-9_0011 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 11 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133435?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 42 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132966; 14689-9_0042 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 42 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132966?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 41 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132957; 14689-9_0041 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 41 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132957?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 40 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132948; 14689-9_0040 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 40 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132948?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 39 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132936; 14689-9_0039 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 39 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132936?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 27 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132925; 14689-9_0027 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 27 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132925?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 26 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132914; 14689-9_0026 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 26 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132914?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 25 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132904; 14689-9_0025 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 25 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132904?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 24 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132897; 14689-9_0024 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 24 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132897?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 45 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132481; 14689-9_0045 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 45 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132481?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 44 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132472; 14689-9_0044 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 44 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132472?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 43 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132468; 14689-9_0043 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 43 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132468?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 33 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132458; 14689-9_0033 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 33 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132458?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 32 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132449; 14689-9_0032 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 32 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132449?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 31 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132441; 14689-9_0031 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 31 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132441?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 18 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132431; 14689-9_0018 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 18 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132431?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 17 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132424; 14689-9_0017 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 17 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132424?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 16 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132419; 14689-9_0016 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 16 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132419?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 15 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132409; 14689-9_0015 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 15 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132409?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 30 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131925; 14689-9_0030 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 30 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131925?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 10 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131919; 14689-9_0010 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 10 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131919?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 9 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131915; 14689-9_0009 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 9 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131915?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 8 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131910; 14689-9_0008 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 8 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131910?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 7 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131895; 14689-9_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 7 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131895?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 48 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131539; 14689-9_0048 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 48 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131539?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 47 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131531; 14689-9_0047 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 47 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131531?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 6 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873130425; 14689-9_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130425?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 5 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873130414; 14689-9_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130414?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 4 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873130068; 14689-9_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130068?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 3 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873130052; 14689-9_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130052?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 2 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873130033; 14689-9_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130033?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 1 of 48] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873129749; 14689-9_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. Phase 4b is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, a levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties borrow areas and at the West Lakeside School site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, permanently encroach on recreational facilities, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100419, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--222 pages and maps, Volume 1--373 pages and maps, Volume 2--543 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129749?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH CORRIDOR: PORTLAND-MILWAUKIE LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CLACKAMAS AND MULTNOMAH COUNTIES, OREGON. [Part 5 of 6] T2 - SOUTH CORRIDOR: PORTLAND-MILWAUKIE LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CLACKAMAS AND MULTNOMAH COUNTIES, OREGON. AN - 868224211; 14692-2_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The development of a 7.3-mile light rail transit (LRT) extension to connect downtown Portland, the City of Milwaukie, and north Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The Portland-Milwaukie light rail project is part of the two-phase South Corridor project, which in turn is part of the larger South/North Corridor extending from Clackamas County to downtown Portland and north to the Columbia River and Vancouver, Washington. The South/North Corridor Project draft EIS was released in February 1998 and a supplemental draft EIS was prepared in May 2008 to address the Portland-Milwaukie Corridor. The supplement also considered findings from the South Corridor supplemental draft EIS of December 2002. The Portland-Milwaukie Corridor includes the city of Milwaukie and much of southeast Portland and the Portland Central City, including the Central Business District, the South Waterfront District, and the Central Eastside Industrial District, all highly concentrated urban zones. This final EIS considers a No-Build Alternative, the locally preferred LRT alternative, and related options and facilities. The proposed alternative would provide for a mostly double-tracked light rail between downtown Portland and Milwaukie, generally paralleling Southeast McLoughlin Boulevard to the east and terminating at Southeast Park Avenue. The system would include 10 LRT stations plus a previously deferred Southwest Jackson station and a future Southeast Harold Station to be developed when land uses and ridership support its development. A new Willamette River bridge would accommodate light rail, buses, bicycles, pedestrians, and a future streetcar. The 1,720-foot long bridge would be a two-tower cable-stayed structure. Bus network adjustments would include elimination and modification of bus routes that would duplicate LRT service and adjustment of routes to connect at LRT stations or transit centers. Two park-and-ride facilities, providing up to 1,400 spaces, would be integrated into the system. Streetcar alignments would be shifted to accommodate LRT along Southwest River Drive. The Ruby Junction Operations and Maintenance Facility would be expanded to accommodate 17 to 20 additional LRT vehicles. The Minimum Operable Segment (MOS) would have one fewer station, with its initial terminus in Milwaukie at Southeast Lake Road. The MOS would allow phased development if there is insufficient funding for the full alignment. Estimated cost of full implementation of the LRT project in year of expenditure dollars is $1.55 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would provide high-quality transit service along a major metropolitan transportation corridor, accommodate future population and economic growth patterns in the area, reduce vehicle miles travelled by as much as 70,000 miles daily, reduce traffic infiltration through neighborhoods, and improve regional air quality. The project would result in up to 14,500 additional person-year jobs and up to $573 million more in additional personal income. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 77 to 95 full properties, one to 11 residences, and 52 to 58 businesses. Construction would affect three historic sites, 22 to 26 acres characterized by a high probability for archaeological resources, and up to four existing and two planned parks. The project would impact one acre of wetlands and 7.6 acres of floodplains, increase impervious surface in the area by approximately 20 acres, and displace 16.2 acres of vegetation. Impacts to streams would include those resulting from relocation of 222 linear feet of stream providing habitat to federally protected fish species. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS on the overall South/North Corridor Project, see 98-0040D, Volume 22, Number 1. For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS for the South Corridor Project, see 03-0207D, Volume 27, Number 2. For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS for the Portland-Milwaukie Light Rail Project, see 08-0326D, Volume 32, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100422, Volume 1--580 pages, Volume 2--439 pages, Public Comments and Responses (Appendix P)--765 pages, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Central Business Districts KW - Creeks KW - Employment KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Fish KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Industrial Districts KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Oregon KW - Willamette River KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224211?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+CORRIDOR%3A+PORTLAND-MILWAUKIE+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CLACKAMAS+AND+MULTNOMAH+COUNTIES%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SOUTH+CORRIDOR%3A+PORTLAND-MILWAUKIE+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CLACKAMAS+AND+MULTNOMAH+COUNTIES%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH CORRIDOR: PORTLAND-MILWAUKIE LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CLACKAMAS AND MULTNOMAH COUNTIES, OREGON. [Part 4 of 6] T2 - SOUTH CORRIDOR: PORTLAND-MILWAUKIE LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CLACKAMAS AND MULTNOMAH COUNTIES, OREGON. AN - 868224203; 14692-2_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The development of a 7.3-mile light rail transit (LRT) extension to connect downtown Portland, the City of Milwaukie, and north Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The Portland-Milwaukie light rail project is part of the two-phase South Corridor project, which in turn is part of the larger South/North Corridor extending from Clackamas County to downtown Portland and north to the Columbia River and Vancouver, Washington. The South/North Corridor Project draft EIS was released in February 1998 and a supplemental draft EIS was prepared in May 2008 to address the Portland-Milwaukie Corridor. The supplement also considered findings from the South Corridor supplemental draft EIS of December 2002. The Portland-Milwaukie Corridor includes the city of Milwaukie and much of southeast Portland and the Portland Central City, including the Central Business District, the South Waterfront District, and the Central Eastside Industrial District, all highly concentrated urban zones. This final EIS considers a No-Build Alternative, the locally preferred LRT alternative, and related options and facilities. The proposed alternative would provide for a mostly double-tracked light rail between downtown Portland and Milwaukie, generally paralleling Southeast McLoughlin Boulevard to the east and terminating at Southeast Park Avenue. The system would include 10 LRT stations plus a previously deferred Southwest Jackson station and a future Southeast Harold Station to be developed when land uses and ridership support its development. A new Willamette River bridge would accommodate light rail, buses, bicycles, pedestrians, and a future streetcar. The 1,720-foot long bridge would be a two-tower cable-stayed structure. Bus network adjustments would include elimination and modification of bus routes that would duplicate LRT service and adjustment of routes to connect at LRT stations or transit centers. Two park-and-ride facilities, providing up to 1,400 spaces, would be integrated into the system. Streetcar alignments would be shifted to accommodate LRT along Southwest River Drive. The Ruby Junction Operations and Maintenance Facility would be expanded to accommodate 17 to 20 additional LRT vehicles. The Minimum Operable Segment (MOS) would have one fewer station, with its initial terminus in Milwaukie at Southeast Lake Road. The MOS would allow phased development if there is insufficient funding for the full alignment. Estimated cost of full implementation of the LRT project in year of expenditure dollars is $1.55 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would provide high-quality transit service along a major metropolitan transportation corridor, accommodate future population and economic growth patterns in the area, reduce vehicle miles travelled by as much as 70,000 miles daily, reduce traffic infiltration through neighborhoods, and improve regional air quality. The project would result in up to 14,500 additional person-year jobs and up to $573 million more in additional personal income. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 77 to 95 full properties, one to 11 residences, and 52 to 58 businesses. Construction would affect three historic sites, 22 to 26 acres characterized by a high probability for archaeological resources, and up to four existing and two planned parks. The project would impact one acre of wetlands and 7.6 acres of floodplains, increase impervious surface in the area by approximately 20 acres, and displace 16.2 acres of vegetation. Impacts to streams would include those resulting from relocation of 222 linear feet of stream providing habitat to federally protected fish species. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS on the overall South/North Corridor Project, see 98-0040D, Volume 22, Number 1. For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS for the South Corridor Project, see 03-0207D, Volume 27, Number 2. For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS for the Portland-Milwaukie Light Rail Project, see 08-0326D, Volume 32, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100422, Volume 1--580 pages, Volume 2--439 pages, Public Comments and Responses (Appendix P)--765 pages, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Central Business Districts KW - Creeks KW - Employment KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Fish KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Industrial Districts KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Oregon KW - Willamette River KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224203?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+CORRIDOR%3A+PORTLAND-MILWAUKIE+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CLACKAMAS+AND+MULTNOMAH+COUNTIES%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SOUTH+CORRIDOR%3A+PORTLAND-MILWAUKIE+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CLACKAMAS+AND+MULTNOMAH+COUNTIES%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH CORRIDOR: PORTLAND-MILWAUKIE LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CLACKAMAS AND MULTNOMAH COUNTIES, OREGON. [Part 3 of 6] T2 - SOUTH CORRIDOR: PORTLAND-MILWAUKIE LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CLACKAMAS AND MULTNOMAH COUNTIES, OREGON. AN - 868224193; 14692-2_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The development of a 7.3-mile light rail transit (LRT) extension to connect downtown Portland, the City of Milwaukie, and north Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The Portland-Milwaukie light rail project is part of the two-phase South Corridor project, which in turn is part of the larger South/North Corridor extending from Clackamas County to downtown Portland and north to the Columbia River and Vancouver, Washington. The South/North Corridor Project draft EIS was released in February 1998 and a supplemental draft EIS was prepared in May 2008 to address the Portland-Milwaukie Corridor. The supplement also considered findings from the South Corridor supplemental draft EIS of December 2002. The Portland-Milwaukie Corridor includes the city of Milwaukie and much of southeast Portland and the Portland Central City, including the Central Business District, the South Waterfront District, and the Central Eastside Industrial District, all highly concentrated urban zones. This final EIS considers a No-Build Alternative, the locally preferred LRT alternative, and related options and facilities. The proposed alternative would provide for a mostly double-tracked light rail between downtown Portland and Milwaukie, generally paralleling Southeast McLoughlin Boulevard to the east and terminating at Southeast Park Avenue. The system would include 10 LRT stations plus a previously deferred Southwest Jackson station and a future Southeast Harold Station to be developed when land uses and ridership support its development. A new Willamette River bridge would accommodate light rail, buses, bicycles, pedestrians, and a future streetcar. The 1,720-foot long bridge would be a two-tower cable-stayed structure. Bus network adjustments would include elimination and modification of bus routes that would duplicate LRT service and adjustment of routes to connect at LRT stations or transit centers. Two park-and-ride facilities, providing up to 1,400 spaces, would be integrated into the system. Streetcar alignments would be shifted to accommodate LRT along Southwest River Drive. The Ruby Junction Operations and Maintenance Facility would be expanded to accommodate 17 to 20 additional LRT vehicles. The Minimum Operable Segment (MOS) would have one fewer station, with its initial terminus in Milwaukie at Southeast Lake Road. The MOS would allow phased development if there is insufficient funding for the full alignment. Estimated cost of full implementation of the LRT project in year of expenditure dollars is $1.55 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would provide high-quality transit service along a major metropolitan transportation corridor, accommodate future population and economic growth patterns in the area, reduce vehicle miles travelled by as much as 70,000 miles daily, reduce traffic infiltration through neighborhoods, and improve regional air quality. The project would result in up to 14,500 additional person-year jobs and up to $573 million more in additional personal income. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 77 to 95 full properties, one to 11 residences, and 52 to 58 businesses. Construction would affect three historic sites, 22 to 26 acres characterized by a high probability for archaeological resources, and up to four existing and two planned parks. The project would impact one acre of wetlands and 7.6 acres of floodplains, increase impervious surface in the area by approximately 20 acres, and displace 16.2 acres of vegetation. Impacts to streams would include those resulting from relocation of 222 linear feet of stream providing habitat to federally protected fish species. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS on the overall South/North Corridor Project, see 98-0040D, Volume 22, Number 1. For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS for the South Corridor Project, see 03-0207D, Volume 27, Number 2. For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS for the Portland-Milwaukie Light Rail Project, see 08-0326D, Volume 32, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100422, Volume 1--580 pages, Volume 2--439 pages, Public Comments and Responses (Appendix P)--765 pages, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Central Business Districts KW - Creeks KW - Employment KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Fish KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Industrial Districts KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Oregon KW - Willamette River KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224193?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+CORRIDOR%3A+PORTLAND-MILWAUKIE+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CLACKAMAS+AND+MULTNOMAH+COUNTIES%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SOUTH+CORRIDOR%3A+PORTLAND-MILWAUKIE+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CLACKAMAS+AND+MULTNOMAH+COUNTIES%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH CORRIDOR: PORTLAND-MILWAUKIE LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CLACKAMAS AND MULTNOMAH COUNTIES, OREGON. [Part 6 of 6] T2 - SOUTH CORRIDOR: PORTLAND-MILWAUKIE LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CLACKAMAS AND MULTNOMAH COUNTIES, OREGON. AN - 868223956; 14692-2_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The development of a 7.3-mile light rail transit (LRT) extension to connect downtown Portland, the City of Milwaukie, and north Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The Portland-Milwaukie light rail project is part of the two-phase South Corridor project, which in turn is part of the larger South/North Corridor extending from Clackamas County to downtown Portland and north to the Columbia River and Vancouver, Washington. The South/North Corridor Project draft EIS was released in February 1998 and a supplemental draft EIS was prepared in May 2008 to address the Portland-Milwaukie Corridor. The supplement also considered findings from the South Corridor supplemental draft EIS of December 2002. The Portland-Milwaukie Corridor includes the city of Milwaukie and much of southeast Portland and the Portland Central City, including the Central Business District, the South Waterfront District, and the Central Eastside Industrial District, all highly concentrated urban zones. This final EIS considers a No-Build Alternative, the locally preferred LRT alternative, and related options and facilities. The proposed alternative would provide for a mostly double-tracked light rail between downtown Portland and Milwaukie, generally paralleling Southeast McLoughlin Boulevard to the east and terminating at Southeast Park Avenue. The system would include 10 LRT stations plus a previously deferred Southwest Jackson station and a future Southeast Harold Station to be developed when land uses and ridership support its development. A new Willamette River bridge would accommodate light rail, buses, bicycles, pedestrians, and a future streetcar. The 1,720-foot long bridge would be a two-tower cable-stayed structure. Bus network adjustments would include elimination and modification of bus routes that would duplicate LRT service and adjustment of routes to connect at LRT stations or transit centers. Two park-and-ride facilities, providing up to 1,400 spaces, would be integrated into the system. Streetcar alignments would be shifted to accommodate LRT along Southwest River Drive. The Ruby Junction Operations and Maintenance Facility would be expanded to accommodate 17 to 20 additional LRT vehicles. The Minimum Operable Segment (MOS) would have one fewer station, with its initial terminus in Milwaukie at Southeast Lake Road. The MOS would allow phased development if there is insufficient funding for the full alignment. Estimated cost of full implementation of the LRT project in year of expenditure dollars is $1.55 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would provide high-quality transit service along a major metropolitan transportation corridor, accommodate future population and economic growth patterns in the area, reduce vehicle miles travelled by as much as 70,000 miles daily, reduce traffic infiltration through neighborhoods, and improve regional air quality. The project would result in up to 14,500 additional person-year jobs and up to $573 million more in additional personal income. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 77 to 95 full properties, one to 11 residences, and 52 to 58 businesses. Construction would affect three historic sites, 22 to 26 acres characterized by a high probability for archaeological resources, and up to four existing and two planned parks. The project would impact one acre of wetlands and 7.6 acres of floodplains, increase impervious surface in the area by approximately 20 acres, and displace 16.2 acres of vegetation. Impacts to streams would include those resulting from relocation of 222 linear feet of stream providing habitat to federally protected fish species. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS on the overall South/North Corridor Project, see 98-0040D, Volume 22, Number 1. For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS for the South Corridor Project, see 03-0207D, Volume 27, Number 2. For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS for the Portland-Milwaukie Light Rail Project, see 08-0326D, Volume 32, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100422, Volume 1--580 pages, Volume 2--439 pages, Public Comments and Responses (Appendix P)--765 pages, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Central Business Districts KW - Creeks KW - Employment KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Fish KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Industrial Districts KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Oregon KW - Willamette River KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223956?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+CORRIDOR%3A+PORTLAND-MILWAUKIE+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CLACKAMAS+AND+MULTNOMAH+COUNTIES%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SOUTH+CORRIDOR%3A+PORTLAND-MILWAUKIE+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CLACKAMAS+AND+MULTNOMAH+COUNTIES%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH CORRIDOR: PORTLAND-MILWAUKIE LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CLACKAMAS AND MULTNOMAH COUNTIES, OREGON. [Part 2 of 6] T2 - SOUTH CORRIDOR: PORTLAND-MILWAUKIE LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CLACKAMAS AND MULTNOMAH COUNTIES, OREGON. AN - 868223951; 14692-2_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The development of a 7.3-mile light rail transit (LRT) extension to connect downtown Portland, the City of Milwaukie, and north Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The Portland-Milwaukie light rail project is part of the two-phase South Corridor project, which in turn is part of the larger South/North Corridor extending from Clackamas County to downtown Portland and north to the Columbia River and Vancouver, Washington. The South/North Corridor Project draft EIS was released in February 1998 and a supplemental draft EIS was prepared in May 2008 to address the Portland-Milwaukie Corridor. The supplement also considered findings from the South Corridor supplemental draft EIS of December 2002. The Portland-Milwaukie Corridor includes the city of Milwaukie and much of southeast Portland and the Portland Central City, including the Central Business District, the South Waterfront District, and the Central Eastside Industrial District, all highly concentrated urban zones. This final EIS considers a No-Build Alternative, the locally preferred LRT alternative, and related options and facilities. The proposed alternative would provide for a mostly double-tracked light rail between downtown Portland and Milwaukie, generally paralleling Southeast McLoughlin Boulevard to the east and terminating at Southeast Park Avenue. The system would include 10 LRT stations plus a previously deferred Southwest Jackson station and a future Southeast Harold Station to be developed when land uses and ridership support its development. A new Willamette River bridge would accommodate light rail, buses, bicycles, pedestrians, and a future streetcar. The 1,720-foot long bridge would be a two-tower cable-stayed structure. Bus network adjustments would include elimination and modification of bus routes that would duplicate LRT service and adjustment of routes to connect at LRT stations or transit centers. Two park-and-ride facilities, providing up to 1,400 spaces, would be integrated into the system. Streetcar alignments would be shifted to accommodate LRT along Southwest River Drive. The Ruby Junction Operations and Maintenance Facility would be expanded to accommodate 17 to 20 additional LRT vehicles. The Minimum Operable Segment (MOS) would have one fewer station, with its initial terminus in Milwaukie at Southeast Lake Road. The MOS would allow phased development if there is insufficient funding for the full alignment. Estimated cost of full implementation of the LRT project in year of expenditure dollars is $1.55 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would provide high-quality transit service along a major metropolitan transportation corridor, accommodate future population and economic growth patterns in the area, reduce vehicle miles travelled by as much as 70,000 miles daily, reduce traffic infiltration through neighborhoods, and improve regional air quality. The project would result in up to 14,500 additional person-year jobs and up to $573 million more in additional personal income. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 77 to 95 full properties, one to 11 residences, and 52 to 58 businesses. Construction would affect three historic sites, 22 to 26 acres characterized by a high probability for archaeological resources, and up to four existing and two planned parks. The project would impact one acre of wetlands and 7.6 acres of floodplains, increase impervious surface in the area by approximately 20 acres, and displace 16.2 acres of vegetation. Impacts to streams would include those resulting from relocation of 222 linear feet of stream providing habitat to federally protected fish species. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS on the overall South/North Corridor Project, see 98-0040D, Volume 22, Number 1. For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS for the South Corridor Project, see 03-0207D, Volume 27, Number 2. For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS for the Portland-Milwaukie Light Rail Project, see 08-0326D, Volume 32, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100422, Volume 1--580 pages, Volume 2--439 pages, Public Comments and Responses (Appendix P)--765 pages, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Central Business Districts KW - Creeks KW - Employment KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Fish KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Industrial Districts KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Oregon KW - Willamette River KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223951?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+CORRIDOR%3A+PORTLAND-MILWAUKIE+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CLACKAMAS+AND+MULTNOMAH+COUNTIES%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SOUTH+CORRIDOR%3A+PORTLAND-MILWAUKIE+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CLACKAMAS+AND+MULTNOMAH+COUNTIES%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH CORRIDOR: PORTLAND-MILWAUKIE LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CLACKAMAS AND MULTNOMAH COUNTIES, OREGON. [Part 1 of 6] T2 - SOUTH CORRIDOR: PORTLAND-MILWAUKIE LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CLACKAMAS AND MULTNOMAH COUNTIES, OREGON. AN - 868223943; 14692-2_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The development of a 7.3-mile light rail transit (LRT) extension to connect downtown Portland, the City of Milwaukie, and north Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The Portland-Milwaukie light rail project is part of the two-phase South Corridor project, which in turn is part of the larger South/North Corridor extending from Clackamas County to downtown Portland and north to the Columbia River and Vancouver, Washington. The South/North Corridor Project draft EIS was released in February 1998 and a supplemental draft EIS was prepared in May 2008 to address the Portland-Milwaukie Corridor. The supplement also considered findings from the South Corridor supplemental draft EIS of December 2002. The Portland-Milwaukie Corridor includes the city of Milwaukie and much of southeast Portland and the Portland Central City, including the Central Business District, the South Waterfront District, and the Central Eastside Industrial District, all highly concentrated urban zones. This final EIS considers a No-Build Alternative, the locally preferred LRT alternative, and related options and facilities. The proposed alternative would provide for a mostly double-tracked light rail between downtown Portland and Milwaukie, generally paralleling Southeast McLoughlin Boulevard to the east and terminating at Southeast Park Avenue. The system would include 10 LRT stations plus a previously deferred Southwest Jackson station and a future Southeast Harold Station to be developed when land uses and ridership support its development. A new Willamette River bridge would accommodate light rail, buses, bicycles, pedestrians, and a future streetcar. The 1,720-foot long bridge would be a two-tower cable-stayed structure. Bus network adjustments would include elimination and modification of bus routes that would duplicate LRT service and adjustment of routes to connect at LRT stations or transit centers. Two park-and-ride facilities, providing up to 1,400 spaces, would be integrated into the system. Streetcar alignments would be shifted to accommodate LRT along Southwest River Drive. The Ruby Junction Operations and Maintenance Facility would be expanded to accommodate 17 to 20 additional LRT vehicles. The Minimum Operable Segment (MOS) would have one fewer station, with its initial terminus in Milwaukie at Southeast Lake Road. The MOS would allow phased development if there is insufficient funding for the full alignment. Estimated cost of full implementation of the LRT project in year of expenditure dollars is $1.55 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would provide high-quality transit service along a major metropolitan transportation corridor, accommodate future population and economic growth patterns in the area, reduce vehicle miles travelled by as much as 70,000 miles daily, reduce traffic infiltration through neighborhoods, and improve regional air quality. The project would result in up to 14,500 additional person-year jobs and up to $573 million more in additional personal income. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 77 to 95 full properties, one to 11 residences, and 52 to 58 businesses. Construction would affect three historic sites, 22 to 26 acres characterized by a high probability for archaeological resources, and up to four existing and two planned parks. The project would impact one acre of wetlands and 7.6 acres of floodplains, increase impervious surface in the area by approximately 20 acres, and displace 16.2 acres of vegetation. Impacts to streams would include those resulting from relocation of 222 linear feet of stream providing habitat to federally protected fish species. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS on the overall South/North Corridor Project, see 98-0040D, Volume 22, Number 1. For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS for the South Corridor Project, see 03-0207D, Volume 27, Number 2. For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS for the Portland-Milwaukie Light Rail Project, see 08-0326D, Volume 32, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100422, Volume 1--580 pages, Volume 2--439 pages, Public Comments and Responses (Appendix P)--765 pages, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Central Business Districts KW - Creeks KW - Employment KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Fish KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Industrial Districts KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Oregon KW - Willamette River KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868223943?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+CORRIDOR%3A+PORTLAND-MILWAUKIE+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CLACKAMAS+AND+MULTNOMAH+COUNTIES%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SOUTH+CORRIDOR%3A+PORTLAND-MILWAUKIE+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CLACKAMAS+AND+MULTNOMAH+COUNTIES%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTH CORRIDOR: PORTLAND-MILWAUKIE LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CLACKAMAS AND MULTNOMAH COUNTIES, OREGON. AN - 815276472; 14692 AB - PURPOSE: The development of a 7.3-mile light rail transit (LRT) extension to connect downtown Portland, the City of Milwaukie, and north Clackamas County, Oregon is proposed. The Portland-Milwaukie light rail project is part of the two-phase South Corridor project, which in turn is part of the larger South/North Corridor extending from Clackamas County to downtown Portland and north to the Columbia River and Vancouver, Washington. The South/North Corridor Project draft EIS was released in February 1998 and a supplemental draft EIS was prepared in May 2008 to address the Portland-Milwaukie Corridor. The supplement also considered findings from the South Corridor supplemental draft EIS of December 2002. The Portland-Milwaukie Corridor includes the city of Milwaukie and much of southeast Portland and the Portland Central City, including the Central Business District, the South Waterfront District, and the Central Eastside Industrial District, all highly concentrated urban zones. This final EIS considers a No-Build Alternative, the locally preferred LRT alternative, and related options and facilities. The proposed alternative would provide for a mostly double-tracked light rail between downtown Portland and Milwaukie, generally paralleling Southeast McLoughlin Boulevard to the east and terminating at Southeast Park Avenue. The system would include 10 LRT stations plus a previously deferred Southwest Jackson station and a future Southeast Harold Station to be developed when land uses and ridership support its development. A new Willamette River bridge would accommodate light rail, buses, bicycles, pedestrians, and a future streetcar. The 1,720-foot long bridge would be a two-tower cable-stayed structure. Bus network adjustments would include elimination and modification of bus routes that would duplicate LRT service and adjustment of routes to connect at LRT stations or transit centers. Two park-and-ride facilities, providing up to 1,400 spaces, would be integrated into the system. Streetcar alignments would be shifted to accommodate LRT along Southwest River Drive. The Ruby Junction Operations and Maintenance Facility would be expanded to accommodate 17 to 20 additional LRT vehicles. The Minimum Operable Segment (MOS) would have one fewer station, with its initial terminus in Milwaukie at Southeast Lake Road. The MOS would allow phased development if there is insufficient funding for the full alignment. Estimated cost of full implementation of the LRT project in year of expenditure dollars is $1.55 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would provide high-quality transit service along a major metropolitan transportation corridor, accommodate future population and economic growth patterns in the area, reduce vehicle miles travelled by as much as 70,000 miles daily, reduce traffic infiltration through neighborhoods, and improve regional air quality. The project would result in up to 14,500 additional person-year jobs and up to $573 million more in additional personal income. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 77 to 95 full properties, one to 11 residences, and 52 to 58 businesses. Construction would affect three historic sites, 22 to 26 acres characterized by a high probability for archaeological resources, and up to four existing and two planned parks. The project would impact one acre of wetlands and 7.6 acres of floodplains, increase impervious surface in the area by approximately 20 acres, and displace 16.2 acres of vegetation. Impacts to streams would include those resulting from relocation of 222 linear feet of stream providing habitat to federally protected fish species. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS on the overall South/North Corridor Project, see 98-0040D, Volume 22, Number 1. For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS for the South Corridor Project, see 03-0207D, Volume 27, Number 2. For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS for the Portland-Milwaukie Light Rail Project, see 08-0326D, Volume 32, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100422, Volume 1--580 pages, Volume 2--439 pages, Public Comments and Responses (Appendix P)--765 pages, October 15, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Central Business Districts KW - Creeks KW - Employment KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Fish KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Industrial Districts KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Oregon KW - Willamette River KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/815276472?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTH+CORRIDOR%3A+PORTLAND-MILWAUKIE+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CLACKAMAS+AND+MULTNOMAH+COUNTIES%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=SOUTH+CORRIDOR%3A+PORTLAND-MILWAUKIE+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CLACKAMAS+AND+MULTNOMAH+COUNTIES%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Overview of economic geology as related to the Iowa DOT and Conklin and Klein Quarries AN - 1270037421; 2013-009200 JF - Geological Society of Iowa Guidebook AU - Reyes, Adriana M AU - Dawson, Malcom R Y1 - 2010/10/09/ PY - 2010 DA - 2010 Oct 09 SP - 9 EP - 14 PB - Geological Society of Iowa, Iowa City, IA KW - United States KW - Spring Grove Member KW - Solon Member KW - aggregate KW - Paleozoic KW - Davenport Member KW - quarries KW - limestone deposits KW - Conklin Quarry KW - Lithograph City Formation KW - Iowa KW - Rapid Member KW - Johnson County Iowa KW - Wapsipinicon Group KW - Devonian KW - Klein Quarry KW - Little Cedar Formation KW - dams KW - Cedar Valley Group KW - Coralville Formation KW - roads KW - construction materials KW - 28A:Economic geology, geology of nonmetal deposits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1270037421?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ageorefmodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Geological+Society+of+Iowa+Guidebook&rft.atitle=Overview+of+economic+geology+as+related+to+the+Iowa+DOT+and+Conklin+and+Klein+Quarries&rft.au=Reyes%2C+Adriana+M%3BDawson%2C+Malcom+R&rft.aulast=Reyes&rft.aufirst=Adriana&rft.date=2010-10-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=9&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Geological+Society+of+Iowa+Guidebook&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://www.iowageology.org/gsiGuidebooks.htm LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2014, American Geosciences Institute. N1 - Date revised - 2013-01-01 N1 - PubXState - IA N1 - Document feature - illus. incl. sect., strat. cols. N1 - Last updated - 2014-09-18 N1 - CODEN - #05636 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - aggregate; Cedar Valley Group; Conklin Quarry; construction materials; Coralville Formation; dams; Davenport Member; Devonian; Iowa; Johnson County Iowa; Klein Quarry; limestone deposits; Lithograph City Formation; Little Cedar Formation; Paleozoic; quarries; Rapid Member; roads; Solon Member; Spring Grove Member; United States; Wapsipinicon Group ER - TY - JOUR T1 - A shred of credible evidence on the long-run elasticity of labour supply AN - 921289199; 4267833 AB - All public policies regarding taxation and the redistribution of income rely on assumptions about the long-run effect of wages rates on labour supply. The variation in existing estimates calls for a simple, natural experiment in which men can change their hours of work, and in which wages have been exogenously and permanently changed. We use a panel dataset of taxi drivers who choose their own hours, and who experienced two exogenous permanent fare increases, and estimate an elasticity of labour supply of -0.2, implying that income effects dominate substitution effects in the long-run labour supply of males. Reprinted by permission of Blackwell Publishers JF - Economica [London] AU - Ashenfelter, Orley AU - Doran, Kirk AU - Schaller, Bruce AD - Princeton University ; University of Notre Dame ; New York City Department of Transportation Y1 - 2010/10// PY - 2010 DA - Oct 2010 SP - 637 EP - 650 VL - 77 IS - 308 SN - 0013-0427, 0013-0427 KW - Economics KW - Taxi drivers KW - Taxation KW - Wage rates KW - Income redistribution KW - Labour supply KW - Public policy UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/921289199?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aibss&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Economica+%5BLondon%5D&rft.atitle=A+shred+of+credible+evidence+on+the+long-run+elasticity+of+labour+supply&rft.au=Ashenfelter%2C+Orley%3BDoran%2C+Kirk%3BSchaller%2C+Bruce&rft.aulast=Ashenfelter&rft.aufirst=Orley&rft.date=2010-10-01&rft.volume=77&rft.issue=308&rft.spage=637&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Economica+%5BLondon%5D&rft.issn=00130427&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111%2Fj.1468-0335.2010.00858.x LA - English DB - International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS) N1 - Date revised - 2013-06-12 N1 - Last updated - 2013-09-16 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - 7180 12401; 12571; 6282 6274 3641 12233; 10472; 13417 13394 13409 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0335.2010.00858.x ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NC-109 CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY, FROM OLD GREENSBORO ROAD (NC-1798) TO I-40/US 311, DAVIDSON AND FORSYTH COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 2 of 2] T2 - NC-109 CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY, FROM OLD GREENSBORO ROAD (NC-1798) TO I-40/US 311, DAVIDSON AND FORSYTH COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 868224125; 14665-4_0002 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements to the NC 109 corridor within the Piedmont region south of Winston-Salem in Davidson and Forsyth counties, North Carolina are proposed. NC 109 is the only direct route between Thomasville and Winston-Salem and functions as a north-south connector between Interstate 85 (I-85), I-85 Business, and I-40/US 311. Existing levels of service on some two-lane segments of NC 109 between Old Greensboro Road (SR 1798) and I-40/US 311 were unacceptable in 2008 and a total of 219 accidents were recorded along this section of roadway between February 2006 and January 2009. Traffic volumes are projected to increase by approximately 90 percent from 2008 to 2035. A No Build Alternative, several build alternatives, and one upgrade existing facility alternative are analyzed in this draft EIS. The new facility would be a four-lane median divided roadway with partial control of access, a design speed of 60 miles per hour (mph) and a posted speed limit of 55 mph. Directional crossovers with offset left turns would be used at major intersections and no signalized intersections are proposed. Driveway accesses along NC 109 would be right in, right out only. Left turns would be accomplished by making a U-turn at a median opening approximately one quarter mile from the intersection. Alternative 1 would upgrade the existing roadway and would be 9.5 miles long with 1.6 miles on new location. Alternative 3 would extend 9.5 miles with 7.75 miles on new location and would include six directional crossovers. Under Alternative 4, the roadway would extend 9.3 miles with 8.5 miles on new location and would include seven crossover intersections. Alternative 5 would extend 8.6 miles with 7.4 miles on new location and also would include seven crossovers. Alternative 6 is the longest at 10.1 miles and 8.7 miles on new location. Five crossover intersections would be included. Preliminary total cost estimates, including construction, right-of-way, and utility costs range from $119.0 million for Alternative 5, to $144.7 million for Alternative 1. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow and service, improve safety, and reduce conflicts between through traffic and local traffic in the project area. Directional crossovers with offset left turns would provide a safer facility by reducing the number of conflict points. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New location development would further fragment wildlife habitat. Total direct wetland impacts would range from 0.14 acre to 0.58 acre. Stream crossings would range from 20 to 34, and stream impacts from 4,432 linear feet to 10,729 linear feet. All 5 build alternatives would cross the 100-year floodplains associated with Abbotts Creek and Brushey Fork. There could be individual and community property access impacts due to relocation of driveways and local roads. Alternatives 3 and 6 would result in displacements along the western edge of the Meadowlands community. Alternatives 4 and 5 would impact three neighborhoods along Gumtree Road west of Friendship-Ledford Road: Cedar Estates, Holly Acres, and Briers Creek. All five alternatives would impact power transmission line towers. Alternatives 1 , 3, and 6 could have minor visual and/or noise impacts on three historic properties: George W. Wall House, D. Austin Parker House, and Mark Parker House. All of the alternatives would introduce a visual intrusion into the largely rural landscape. Alternative 1 would result in highest number of total impacted noise receptors at 97, while Alternative 5 would result in the lowest number at 31 impacted noise receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100394, 246 pages, October 1, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Creeks KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224125?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NC-109+CORRIDOR+IMPROVEMENT+STUDY%2C+FROM+OLD+GREENSBORO+ROAD+%28NC-1798%29+TO+I-40%2FUS+311%2C+DAVIDSON+AND+FORSYTH+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=NC-109+CORRIDOR+IMPROVEMENT+STUDY%2C+FROM+OLD+GREENSBORO+ROAD+%28NC-1798%29+TO+I-40%2FUS+311%2C+DAVIDSON+AND+FORSYTH+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 1, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NC-109 CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY, FROM OLD GREENSBORO ROAD (NC-1798) TO I-40/US 311, DAVIDSON AND FORSYTH COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 1 of 2] T2 - NC-109 CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY, FROM OLD GREENSBORO ROAD (NC-1798) TO I-40/US 311, DAVIDSON AND FORSYTH COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 868224118; 14665-4_0001 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements to the NC 109 corridor within the Piedmont region south of Winston-Salem in Davidson and Forsyth counties, North Carolina are proposed. NC 109 is the only direct route between Thomasville and Winston-Salem and functions as a north-south connector between Interstate 85 (I-85), I-85 Business, and I-40/US 311. Existing levels of service on some two-lane segments of NC 109 between Old Greensboro Road (SR 1798) and I-40/US 311 were unacceptable in 2008 and a total of 219 accidents were recorded along this section of roadway between February 2006 and January 2009. Traffic volumes are projected to increase by approximately 90 percent from 2008 to 2035. A No Build Alternative, several build alternatives, and one upgrade existing facility alternative are analyzed in this draft EIS. The new facility would be a four-lane median divided roadway with partial control of access, a design speed of 60 miles per hour (mph) and a posted speed limit of 55 mph. Directional crossovers with offset left turns would be used at major intersections and no signalized intersections are proposed. Driveway accesses along NC 109 would be right in, right out only. Left turns would be accomplished by making a U-turn at a median opening approximately one quarter mile from the intersection. Alternative 1 would upgrade the existing roadway and would be 9.5 miles long with 1.6 miles on new location. Alternative 3 would extend 9.5 miles with 7.75 miles on new location and would include six directional crossovers. Under Alternative 4, the roadway would extend 9.3 miles with 8.5 miles on new location and would include seven crossover intersections. Alternative 5 would extend 8.6 miles with 7.4 miles on new location and also would include seven crossovers. Alternative 6 is the longest at 10.1 miles and 8.7 miles on new location. Five crossover intersections would be included. Preliminary total cost estimates, including construction, right-of-way, and utility costs range from $119.0 million for Alternative 5, to $144.7 million for Alternative 1. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow and service, improve safety, and reduce conflicts between through traffic and local traffic in the project area. Directional crossovers with offset left turns would provide a safer facility by reducing the number of conflict points. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New location development would further fragment wildlife habitat. Total direct wetland impacts would range from 0.14 acre to 0.58 acre. Stream crossings would range from 20 to 34, and stream impacts from 4,432 linear feet to 10,729 linear feet. All 5 build alternatives would cross the 100-year floodplains associated with Abbotts Creek and Brushey Fork. There could be individual and community property access impacts due to relocation of driveways and local roads. Alternatives 3 and 6 would result in displacements along the western edge of the Meadowlands community. Alternatives 4 and 5 would impact three neighborhoods along Gumtree Road west of Friendship-Ledford Road: Cedar Estates, Holly Acres, and Briers Creek. All five alternatives would impact power transmission line towers. Alternatives 1 , 3, and 6 could have minor visual and/or noise impacts on three historic properties: George W. Wall House, D. Austin Parker House, and Mark Parker House. All of the alternatives would introduce a visual intrusion into the largely rural landscape. Alternative 1 would result in highest number of total impacted noise receptors at 97, while Alternative 5 would result in the lowest number at 31 impacted noise receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100394, 246 pages, October 1, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Creeks KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224118?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NC-109+CORRIDOR+IMPROVEMENT+STUDY%2C+FROM+OLD+GREENSBORO+ROAD+%28NC-1798%29+TO+I-40%2FUS+311%2C+DAVIDSON+AND+FORSYTH+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=NC-109+CORRIDOR+IMPROVEMENT+STUDY%2C+FROM+OLD+GREENSBORO+ROAD+%28NC-1798%29+TO+I-40%2FUS+311%2C+DAVIDSON+AND+FORSYTH+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 1, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Train-Vehicle Crash Risk Comparison Between Before and After Stop Signs Installed at Highway-Rail Grade Crossings AN - 855703776; 14138528 AB - Objective: The safety benefit of stop sign treatment employed at passive highway-rail crossings has been a subject of research for many years. The objectives of this research is to investigate whether and to what degree the crash rate has changed at previously passive grade crossings after stop signs were implemented and examine whether and how the crash characteristics (associated with vehicle type, crossing surrounding, crossing design, crash severity, etc.) changed subsequently. Methods: Federal Railroad Administration grade crossing databases during the 26-year period (1980-2005) were applied in this study. Among the stop-controlled grade crossings, a total of 7394 "target" crossings were identified to be once crossbucks controlled and subsequently upgraded with the installation of stop signs without the implementation of other traffic control devices during the study period. Each target crossing was further divided into two time periods: when it was controlled by crossbucks only (before) and when it was controlled by stop signs (after). Both annual crash rate analysis and crash propensity analysis of before-after stop sign installation are conducted to quantify the safety benefit of stop sign treatment. Results: It was found that during the 26-year period (1980-2005), the annual crash rates when the crossings were controlled by crossbucks-only were consistently higher than the crash rates when the crossings were controlled by stop signs. The further crash propensity analysis indicated that the stop sign treatment was especially effective at crossings with higher annual average daily traffic (AADT), advanced warning signs, sight distance problem, adverse lighting conditions; the motorist-stopped-on-crossing, did-not-stop, and injury crash risks were also significantly reduced after stop signs were applied. Conclusions: The finding of this study suggested that the vehicle volume should be included into the guideline for stop sign use. Therefore, engineers and decision makers are encouraged to routinely check available sight distances at passive crossings controlled by crossbucks only and add stop signs to the crossings with insufficient sight distances. Additionally, it is suggested that advanced warning signs should be jointly used at stop-controlled crossings to maximize the safety effect. However, stop signs were less effective at crossings with higher train speeds or track classifications, where active warning devices may be a better safety solution for grade crossings. JF - Traffic Injury Prevention AU - Yan, Xuedong AU - Han, Lee D AU - Richards, Stephen AU - Millegan, Hal AD - MOE Key Laboratory for Transportation Complex Systems Theory and Technology, Department of Transportation Engineering, School of Traffic & Transportation, Beijing Jiaotong University, Beijing, P. R. China Y1 - 2010/10// PY - 2010 DA - Oct 2010 SP - 535 EP - 542 PB - Taylor & Francis Group Ltd., 2 Park Square Oxford OX14 4RN UK VL - 11 IS - 5 SN - 1538-9588, 1538-9588 KW - Risk Abstracts; Health & Safety Science Abstracts KW - safety engineering KW - traffic KW - Injuries KW - guidelines KW - Railroads KW - classification KW - prevention KW - Lighting KW - traffic safety KW - R2 23020:Technological risks KW - H 2000:Transportation UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/855703776?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ariskabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Traffic+Injury+Prevention&rft.atitle=Train-Vehicle+Crash+Risk+Comparison+Between+Before+and+After+Stop+Signs+Installed+at+Highway-Rail+Grade+Crossings&rft.au=Yan%2C+Xuedong%3BHan%2C+Lee+D%3BRichards%2C+Stephen%3BMillegan%2C+Hal&rft.aulast=Yan&rft.aufirst=Xuedong&rft.date=2010-10-01&rft.volume=11&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=535&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Traffic+Injury+Prevention&rft.issn=15389588&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080%2F15389588.2010.494314 L2 - http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~db=all~content=a927277998~frm=abslink LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-03-01 N1 - Last updated - 2015-03-19 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - traffic; safety engineering; Injuries; guidelines; Railroads; classification; prevention; Lighting; traffic safety DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15389588.2010.494314 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Estimation of Fatality and Injury Risk by Means of In-Depth Fatal Accident Investigation Data AN - 855701877; 14138515 AB - Objective: In this article the factors affecting fatality and injury risk of road users involved in fatal accidents are analyzed by means of in-depth accident investigation data, with emphasis on parameters not extensively explored in previous research. Methods: A fatal accident investigation (FAI) database is used, which includes intermediate-level in-depth data for a harmonized representative sample of 1300 fatal accidents in 7 European countries. The FAI database offers improved potential for analysis, because it includes information on a number of variables that are seldom available, complete, or accurately recorded in road accident databases. However, the fact that only fatal accidents are examined requires for methodological adjustments, namely, the correction for two types of effects on a road user's baseline risk: "accident size" effects, and "relative vulnerability" effects. Fatality and injury risk can be then modeled through multilevel logistic regression models, which account for the hierarchical dependences of the road accident process. Results: The results show that the baseline fatality risk of road users involved in fatal accidents decreases with accident size and increases with the vulnerability of the road user. On the contrary, accident size increases nonfatal injury risk of road users involved in fatal accidents. Other significant effects on fatality and injury risk in fatal accidents include road user age, vehicle type, speed limit, the chain of accident events, vehicle maneuver, and safety equipment. In particular, the presence and use of safety equipment such as seat belt, antilock braking system (ABS), and electronic stability program (ESP) are protection factors for car occupants, especially for those seated at the front seats. Conclusions: Although ABS and ESP systems are typically associated with positive effects on accident occurrence, the results of this research revealed significant related effects on accident severity as well. Moreover, accident consequences are more severe when the most harmful event of the accident occurs later within the accident chain. JF - Traffic Injury Prevention AU - Yannis, George AU - Papadimitriou, Eleonora AU - Dupont, Emmanuelle AU - Martensen, Heike AD - Department of Transportation Planning and Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, Athens, Greece Y1 - 2010/10// PY - 2010 DA - Oct 2010 SP - 492 EP - 502 PB - Taylor & Francis Group Ltd., 2 Park Square Oxford OX14 4RN UK VL - 11 IS - 5 SN - 1538-9588, 1538-9588 KW - Risk Abstracts; Health & Safety Science Abstracts KW - Mortality KW - Accidents KW - traffic KW - Injuries KW - Antilock braking systems KW - vulnerability KW - Protective equipment KW - safety equipment KW - seat belts KW - H 2000:Transportation KW - R2 23010:General: Models, forecasting UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/855701877?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ariskabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Traffic+Injury+Prevention&rft.atitle=Estimation+of+Fatality+and+Injury+Risk+by+Means+of+In-Depth+Fatal+Accident+Investigation+Data&rft.au=Yannis%2C+George%3BPapadimitriou%2C+Eleonora%3BDupont%2C+Emmanuelle%3BMartensen%2C+Heike&rft.aulast=Yannis&rft.aufirst=George&rft.date=2010-10-01&rft.volume=11&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=492&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Traffic+Injury+Prevention&rft.issn=15389588&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080%2F15389588.2010.492536 L2 - http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~db=all~content=a927276559~frm=titlelink LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-03-01 N1 - Last updated - 2015-03-19 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Mortality; Accidents; traffic; Injuries; Antilock braking systems; vulnerability; Protective equipment; seat belts; safety equipment DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15389588.2010.492536 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NC-109 CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY, FROM OLD GREENSBORO ROAD (NC-1798) TO I-40/US 311, DAVIDSON AND FORSYTH COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 772293292; 14665 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements to the NC 109 corridor within the Piedmont region south of Winston-Salem in Davidson and Forsyth counties, North Carolina are proposed. NC 109 is the only direct route between Thomasville and Winston-Salem and functions as a north-south connector between Interstate 85 (I-85), I-85 Business, and I-40/US 311. Existing levels of service on some two-lane segments of NC 109 between Old Greensboro Road (SR 1798) and I-40/US 311 were unacceptable in 2008 and a total of 219 accidents were recorded along this section of roadway between February 2006 and January 2009. Traffic volumes are projected to increase by approximately 90 percent from 2008 to 2035. A No Build Alternative, several build alternatives, and one upgrade existing facility alternative are analyzed in this draft EIS. The new facility would be a four-lane median divided roadway with partial control of access, a design speed of 60 miles per hour (mph) and a posted speed limit of 55 mph. Directional crossovers with offset left turns would be used at major intersections and no signalized intersections are proposed. Driveway accesses along NC 109 would be right in, right out only. Left turns would be accomplished by making a U-turn at a median opening approximately one quarter mile from the intersection. Alternative 1 would upgrade the existing roadway and would be 9.5 miles long with 1.6 miles on new location. Alternative 3 would extend 9.5 miles with 7.75 miles on new location and would include six directional crossovers. Under Alternative 4, the roadway would extend 9.3 miles with 8.5 miles on new location and would include seven crossover intersections. Alternative 5 would extend 8.6 miles with 7.4 miles on new location and also would include seven crossovers. Alternative 6 is the longest at 10.1 miles and 8.7 miles on new location. Five crossover intersections would be included. Preliminary total cost estimates, including construction, right-of-way, and utility costs range from $119.0 million for Alternative 5, to $144.7 million for Alternative 1. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve traffic flow and service, improve safety, and reduce conflicts between through traffic and local traffic in the project area. Directional crossovers with offset left turns would provide a safer facility by reducing the number of conflict points. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New location development would further fragment wildlife habitat. Total direct wetland impacts would range from 0.14 acre to 0.58 acre. Stream crossings would range from 20 to 34, and stream impacts from 4,432 linear feet to 10,729 linear feet. All 5 build alternatives would cross the 100-year floodplains associated with Abbotts Creek and Brushey Fork. There could be individual and community property access impacts due to relocation of driveways and local roads. Alternatives 3 and 6 would result in displacements along the western edge of the Meadowlands community. Alternatives 4 and 5 would impact three neighborhoods along Gumtree Road west of Friendship-Ledford Road: Cedar Estates, Holly Acres, and Briers Creek. All five alternatives would impact power transmission line towers. Alternatives 1 , 3, and 6 could have minor visual and/or noise impacts on three historic properties: George W. Wall House, D. Austin Parker House, and Mark Parker House. All of the alternatives would introduce a visual intrusion into the largely rural landscape. Alternative 1 would result in highest number of total impacted noise receptors at 97, while Alternative 5 would result in the lowest number at 31 impacted noise receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100394, 246 pages, October 1, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Creeks KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/772293292?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-10-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NC-109+CORRIDOR+IMPROVEMENT+STUDY%2C+FROM+OLD+GREENSBORO+ROAD+%28NC-1798%29+TO+I-40%2FUS+311%2C+DAVIDSON+AND+FORSYTH+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=NC-109+CORRIDOR+IMPROVEMENT+STUDY%2C+FROM+OLD+GREENSBORO+ROAD+%28NC-1798%29+TO+I-40%2FUS+311%2C+DAVIDSON+AND+FORSYTH+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 1, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Shear wave velocity as function of standard penetration test resistance and vertical effective stress at California bridge sites AN - 1722156936; 2015-099540 AB - Shear wave velocity, V (sub s) , is defined as a statistical function of SPT blow count, N (sub 60) , and vertical effective stress, sigma ' (sub v) , using a data set collected at various California bridge sites. At each site, V (sub s) measurements were recorded by suspension logging in the same borehole in which N (sub 60) was measured. Regression analysis was used to derive statistical relations for sand, silt, and clay soil types. The relation between V (sub s) and N (sub 60) is shown to depend strongly on sigma ' (sub v) since V (sub s) and N (sub 60) normalize differently with overburden, which has been mostly omitted in previously published correlations. A random effects regression model is used to separate the error into intra- and inter-boring terms. Inter-boring errors are shown to depend weakly on geologic age. The average shear wave velocity in the upper 30m, V (sub s30) , is computed directly from the suspension logs and compared with V (sub s30) computed from the statistical relations. The relations are shown to provide unbiased estimates of V (sub s30) , with standard deviation of the error equal to the standard deviation of the inter-boring error term. Ground motion prediction equations require V (sub s30) as an input parameter, and the statistical relations may be useful for estimating V (sub s30) at sites where only penetration resistance data are available. The proposed relations should not substitute for more accurate geophysical measurements when predicted ground motions are sensitive to the uncertainty in V (sub s30) , but may be useful for identifying whether geophysical measurements should be performed to better refine the V (sub s30) estimate. Abstract Copyright (2010) Elsevier, B.V. JF - Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering (1984) AU - Brandenberg, Scott J AU - Bellana, Naresh AU - Shantz, Thomas Y1 - 2010/10// PY - 2010 DA - October 2010 SP - 1026 EP - 1035 PB - Elsevier, Southampton VL - 30 IS - 10 SN - 0267-7261, 0267-7261 KW - United States KW - clay KW - penetration tests KW - engineering properties KW - well-logging KW - standard deviation KW - elastic waves KW - California KW - errors KW - sediments KW - velocity KW - bridges KW - uncertainty KW - soils KW - soil mechanics KW - sand KW - body waves KW - overburden KW - clastic sediments KW - stress KW - statistical analysis KW - prediction KW - silt KW - boreholes KW - ground motion KW - seismic waves KW - S-waves KW - regression analysis KW - 30:Engineering geology KW - 20:Applied geophysics UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1722156936?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ageorefmodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Soil+Dynamics+and+Earthquake+Engineering+%281984%29&rft.atitle=Shear+wave+velocity+as+function+of+standard+penetration+test+resistance+and+vertical+effective+stress+at+California+bridge+sites&rft.au=Brandenberg%2C+Scott+J%3BBellana%2C+Naresh%3BShantz%2C+Thomas&rft.aulast=Brandenberg&rft.aufirst=Scott&rft.date=2010-10-01&rft.volume=30&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=1026&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Soil+Dynamics+and+Earthquake+Engineering+%281984%29&rft.issn=02677261&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016%2Fj.soildyn.2010.04.014 LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2015, American Geosciences Institute. Reference includes data from CAPCAS, Elsevier Scientific Publishers, Amsterdam, Netherlands N1 - Date revised - 2015-01-01 N1 - Number of references - 24 N1 - Document feature - illus. incl. 4 tables, sketch map N1 - Last updated - 2015-10-15 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - body waves; boreholes; bridges; California; clastic sediments; clay; elastic waves; engineering properties; errors; ground motion; overburden; penetration tests; prediction; regression analysis; S-waves; sand; sediments; seismic waves; silt; soil mechanics; soils; standard deviation; statistical analysis; stress; uncertainty; United States; velocity; well-logging DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2010.04.014 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTHWEST I-75/I-575 CORRIDOR, COBB AND CHEROKEE COUNTIES, GEORGIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2007). [Part 8 of 9] T2 - NORTHWEST I-75/I-575 CORRIDOR, COBB AND CHEROKEE COUNTIES, GEORGIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2007). AN - 873133693; 14644-2_0008 AB - PURPOSE: Highway improvements for Interstate 75 (I-75) and I-575 in the Atlanta metropolitan area of Georgia are proposed. The Northwest Corridor study area, which extends from downtown Atlanta in Fulton County northwest into Cobb and Cherokee counties, encompasses a substantial portion of the region's population, including several low-income and Hispanic communities. The metropolitan area has experienced tremendous growth in population and employment since 1990, particularly in the Northwest Corridor. Five alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative, were considered in the draft EIS of May 2007. Substantial opposition and concern over anticipated costs for both the truck-only lane and bus rapid transit elements of the four build alternatives previously evaluated led to the decision in 2008 to eliminate the truck-only lanes and the bus rapid transit elements from further consideration. This supplemental draft EIS considers the No-Build Alternative and the Two-Lane Reversible Alternative which would involve constructing a tolled reversible managed-lane system on I-75 and I-575. The improvements would be made on I-75 from just south of the I-285 interchange at Akers Mill Road northwesterly to north of Hickory Grove Road and on I-575 from I-75 northeasterly to Sixes Road. The total length of proposed highway corridor improvements is about 27 miles. The proposed new managed lanes on I-75 would be reversible managed lanes that would only serve the peak period main direction of traffic flow. During the morning peak commute period, both lanes would accommodate southbound traffic. During the evening peak commute period, the directional flow of the traffic would be reversed to accommodate northbound traffic. At the I-75/I-575 interchange, the two reversible lanes would split and a single reversible lane would continue northwesterly on I-75 to north of Hickory Grove Road and northeasterly on I-575 to Sixes Road. In both cases, the single managed lane would be located in the existing highway medians. In addition, while the existing general-purpose lanes and shoulders may be relocated slightly, neither would be reduced in width. Like the two reversible lanes on I-75 south of the I-75/I-575 interchange, the single reversible lanes would only accommodate peak period directional flows. Vehicles would use both managed-lane interchanges and slip ramps to access the reversible lanes. A total of six managed-lane interchanges would be constructed on I-75 at: I-285, Terrell Mill Road, Roswell Road, I-575, Big Shanty Road and Hickory Grove Road. On I-575, three pairs of slip ramps would be constructed. These would generally be located near existing general-purpose interchanges at Barrett Parkway, Shallowford Road and Sixes Road. For safety reasons, the southbound managed-lane interchange on-ramps and managed-lane slip ramps would only allow vehicles to enter the reversible-lane system and travel southbound during the morning peak period. Similarly, the northbound managed-lane interchange on-ramps and managed-lane slip ramps would only allow vehicles to travel northbound in the evening peak period. Cost of the build alternative is estimated at $1.0 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would improve the transportation effectiveness of I-75 and I-575, allowing the facilities to accommodate additional traffic and contributing to the improved performance of the regional system. Improved movement of traffic would reduce emission of criteria air pollutants somewhat. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Development of the build alternative would result in 12 full and 59 partial acquisitions of property parcels, resulting in the displacement of six residences and six commercial properties including 11 businesses. Low-income and minority groups would be disproportionately affected by displacements. The project would require the relocation of 150 linear feet of stream, displacement of 0.3 acres of wetlands, and the placement of fill in 17 acres of floodplain. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity of well over 700 sensitive noise receptors. Construction workers could encounter eight hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0383D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100372, Volume 1--789 pages, Volume 2--76 pages (oversize maps), Technical Reports and Comments--12 volumes, September 10, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Environmental Justice KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Georgia KW - Executive Order 12898, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133693?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-09-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTHWEST+I-75%2FI-575+CORRIDOR%2C+COBB+AND+CHEROKEE+COUNTIES%2C+GEORGIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2007%29.&rft.title=NORTHWEST+I-75%2FI-575+CORRIDOR%2C+COBB+AND+CHEROKEE+COUNTIES%2C+GEORGIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2007%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Atlanta, Georgia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 10, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTHWEST I-75/I-575 CORRIDOR, COBB AND CHEROKEE COUNTIES, GEORGIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2007). [Part 7 of 9] T2 - NORTHWEST I-75/I-575 CORRIDOR, COBB AND CHEROKEE COUNTIES, GEORGIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2007). AN - 873133690; 14644-2_0007 AB - PURPOSE: Highway improvements for Interstate 75 (I-75) and I-575 in the Atlanta metropolitan area of Georgia are proposed. The Northwest Corridor study area, which extends from downtown Atlanta in Fulton County northwest into Cobb and Cherokee counties, encompasses a substantial portion of the region's population, including several low-income and Hispanic communities. The metropolitan area has experienced tremendous growth in population and employment since 1990, particularly in the Northwest Corridor. Five alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative, were considered in the draft EIS of May 2007. Substantial opposition and concern over anticipated costs for both the truck-only lane and bus rapid transit elements of the four build alternatives previously evaluated led to the decision in 2008 to eliminate the truck-only lanes and the bus rapid transit elements from further consideration. This supplemental draft EIS considers the No-Build Alternative and the Two-Lane Reversible Alternative which would involve constructing a tolled reversible managed-lane system on I-75 and I-575. The improvements would be made on I-75 from just south of the I-285 interchange at Akers Mill Road northwesterly to north of Hickory Grove Road and on I-575 from I-75 northeasterly to Sixes Road. The total length of proposed highway corridor improvements is about 27 miles. The proposed new managed lanes on I-75 would be reversible managed lanes that would only serve the peak period main direction of traffic flow. During the morning peak commute period, both lanes would accommodate southbound traffic. During the evening peak commute period, the directional flow of the traffic would be reversed to accommodate northbound traffic. At the I-75/I-575 interchange, the two reversible lanes would split and a single reversible lane would continue northwesterly on I-75 to north of Hickory Grove Road and northeasterly on I-575 to Sixes Road. In both cases, the single managed lane would be located in the existing highway medians. In addition, while the existing general-purpose lanes and shoulders may be relocated slightly, neither would be reduced in width. Like the two reversible lanes on I-75 south of the I-75/I-575 interchange, the single reversible lanes would only accommodate peak period directional flows. Vehicles would use both managed-lane interchanges and slip ramps to access the reversible lanes. A total of six managed-lane interchanges would be constructed on I-75 at: I-285, Terrell Mill Road, Roswell Road, I-575, Big Shanty Road and Hickory Grove Road. On I-575, three pairs of slip ramps would be constructed. These would generally be located near existing general-purpose interchanges at Barrett Parkway, Shallowford Road and Sixes Road. For safety reasons, the southbound managed-lane interchange on-ramps and managed-lane slip ramps would only allow vehicles to enter the reversible-lane system and travel southbound during the morning peak period. Similarly, the northbound managed-lane interchange on-ramps and managed-lane slip ramps would only allow vehicles to travel northbound in the evening peak period. Cost of the build alternative is estimated at $1.0 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would improve the transportation effectiveness of I-75 and I-575, allowing the facilities to accommodate additional traffic and contributing to the improved performance of the regional system. Improved movement of traffic would reduce emission of criteria air pollutants somewhat. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Development of the build alternative would result in 12 full and 59 partial acquisitions of property parcels, resulting in the displacement of six residences and six commercial properties including 11 businesses. Low-income and minority groups would be disproportionately affected by displacements. The project would require the relocation of 150 linear feet of stream, displacement of 0.3 acres of wetlands, and the placement of fill in 17 acres of floodplain. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity of well over 700 sensitive noise receptors. Construction workers could encounter eight hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0383D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100372, Volume 1--789 pages, Volume 2--76 pages (oversize maps), Technical Reports and Comments--12 volumes, September 10, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Environmental Justice KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Georgia KW - Executive Order 12898, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133690?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-09-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTHWEST+I-75%2FI-575+CORRIDOR%2C+COBB+AND+CHEROKEE+COUNTIES%2C+GEORGIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2007%29.&rft.title=NORTHWEST+I-75%2FI-575+CORRIDOR%2C+COBB+AND+CHEROKEE+COUNTIES%2C+GEORGIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2007%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Atlanta, Georgia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 10, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTHWEST I-75/I-575 CORRIDOR, COBB AND CHEROKEE COUNTIES, GEORGIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2007). [Part 6 of 9] T2 - NORTHWEST I-75/I-575 CORRIDOR, COBB AND CHEROKEE COUNTIES, GEORGIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2007). AN - 873133688; 14644-2_0006 AB - PURPOSE: Highway improvements for Interstate 75 (I-75) and I-575 in the Atlanta metropolitan area of Georgia are proposed. The Northwest Corridor study area, which extends from downtown Atlanta in Fulton County northwest into Cobb and Cherokee counties, encompasses a substantial portion of the region's population, including several low-income and Hispanic communities. The metropolitan area has experienced tremendous growth in population and employment since 1990, particularly in the Northwest Corridor. Five alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative, were considered in the draft EIS of May 2007. Substantial opposition and concern over anticipated costs for both the truck-only lane and bus rapid transit elements of the four build alternatives previously evaluated led to the decision in 2008 to eliminate the truck-only lanes and the bus rapid transit elements from further consideration. This supplemental draft EIS considers the No-Build Alternative and the Two-Lane Reversible Alternative which would involve constructing a tolled reversible managed-lane system on I-75 and I-575. The improvements would be made on I-75 from just south of the I-285 interchange at Akers Mill Road northwesterly to north of Hickory Grove Road and on I-575 from I-75 northeasterly to Sixes Road. The total length of proposed highway corridor improvements is about 27 miles. The proposed new managed lanes on I-75 would be reversible managed lanes that would only serve the peak period main direction of traffic flow. During the morning peak commute period, both lanes would accommodate southbound traffic. During the evening peak commute period, the directional flow of the traffic would be reversed to accommodate northbound traffic. At the I-75/I-575 interchange, the two reversible lanes would split and a single reversible lane would continue northwesterly on I-75 to north of Hickory Grove Road and northeasterly on I-575 to Sixes Road. In both cases, the single managed lane would be located in the existing highway medians. In addition, while the existing general-purpose lanes and shoulders may be relocated slightly, neither would be reduced in width. Like the two reversible lanes on I-75 south of the I-75/I-575 interchange, the single reversible lanes would only accommodate peak period directional flows. Vehicles would use both managed-lane interchanges and slip ramps to access the reversible lanes. A total of six managed-lane interchanges would be constructed on I-75 at: I-285, Terrell Mill Road, Roswell Road, I-575, Big Shanty Road and Hickory Grove Road. On I-575, three pairs of slip ramps would be constructed. These would generally be located near existing general-purpose interchanges at Barrett Parkway, Shallowford Road and Sixes Road. For safety reasons, the southbound managed-lane interchange on-ramps and managed-lane slip ramps would only allow vehicles to enter the reversible-lane system and travel southbound during the morning peak period. Similarly, the northbound managed-lane interchange on-ramps and managed-lane slip ramps would only allow vehicles to travel northbound in the evening peak period. Cost of the build alternative is estimated at $1.0 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would improve the transportation effectiveness of I-75 and I-575, allowing the facilities to accommodate additional traffic and contributing to the improved performance of the regional system. Improved movement of traffic would reduce emission of criteria air pollutants somewhat. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Development of the build alternative would result in 12 full and 59 partial acquisitions of property parcels, resulting in the displacement of six residences and six commercial properties including 11 businesses. Low-income and minority groups would be disproportionately affected by displacements. The project would require the relocation of 150 linear feet of stream, displacement of 0.3 acres of wetlands, and the placement of fill in 17 acres of floodplain. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity of well over 700 sensitive noise receptors. Construction workers could encounter eight hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0383D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100372, Volume 1--789 pages, Volume 2--76 pages (oversize maps), Technical Reports and Comments--12 volumes, September 10, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Environmental Justice KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Georgia KW - Executive Order 12898, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133688?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-09-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTHWEST+I-75%2FI-575+CORRIDOR%2C+COBB+AND+CHEROKEE+COUNTIES%2C+GEORGIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2007%29.&rft.title=NORTHWEST+I-75%2FI-575+CORRIDOR%2C+COBB+AND+CHEROKEE+COUNTIES%2C+GEORGIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2007%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Atlanta, Georgia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 10, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTHWEST I-75/I-575 CORRIDOR, COBB AND CHEROKEE COUNTIES, GEORGIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2007). [Part 5 of 9] T2 - NORTHWEST I-75/I-575 CORRIDOR, COBB AND CHEROKEE COUNTIES, GEORGIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2007). AN - 873133683; 14644-2_0005 AB - PURPOSE: Highway improvements for Interstate 75 (I-75) and I-575 in the Atlanta metropolitan area of Georgia are proposed. The Northwest Corridor study area, which extends from downtown Atlanta in Fulton County northwest into Cobb and Cherokee counties, encompasses a substantial portion of the region's population, including several low-income and Hispanic communities. The metropolitan area has experienced tremendous growth in population and employment since 1990, particularly in the Northwest Corridor. Five alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative, were considered in the draft EIS of May 2007. Substantial opposition and concern over anticipated costs for both the truck-only lane and bus rapid transit elements of the four build alternatives previously evaluated led to the decision in 2008 to eliminate the truck-only lanes and the bus rapid transit elements from further consideration. This supplemental draft EIS considers the No-Build Alternative and the Two-Lane Reversible Alternative which would involve constructing a tolled reversible managed-lane system on I-75 and I-575. The improvements would be made on I-75 from just south of the I-285 interchange at Akers Mill Road northwesterly to north of Hickory Grove Road and on I-575 from I-75 northeasterly to Sixes Road. The total length of proposed highway corridor improvements is about 27 miles. The proposed new managed lanes on I-75 would be reversible managed lanes that would only serve the peak period main direction of traffic flow. During the morning peak commute period, both lanes would accommodate southbound traffic. During the evening peak commute period, the directional flow of the traffic would be reversed to accommodate northbound traffic. At the I-75/I-575 interchange, the two reversible lanes would split and a single reversible lane would continue northwesterly on I-75 to north of Hickory Grove Road and northeasterly on I-575 to Sixes Road. In both cases, the single managed lane would be located in the existing highway medians. In addition, while the existing general-purpose lanes and shoulders may be relocated slightly, neither would be reduced in width. Like the two reversible lanes on I-75 south of the I-75/I-575 interchange, the single reversible lanes would only accommodate peak period directional flows. Vehicles would use both managed-lane interchanges and slip ramps to access the reversible lanes. A total of six managed-lane interchanges would be constructed on I-75 at: I-285, Terrell Mill Road, Roswell Road, I-575, Big Shanty Road and Hickory Grove Road. On I-575, three pairs of slip ramps would be constructed. These would generally be located near existing general-purpose interchanges at Barrett Parkway, Shallowford Road and Sixes Road. For safety reasons, the southbound managed-lane interchange on-ramps and managed-lane slip ramps would only allow vehicles to enter the reversible-lane system and travel southbound during the morning peak period. Similarly, the northbound managed-lane interchange on-ramps and managed-lane slip ramps would only allow vehicles to travel northbound in the evening peak period. Cost of the build alternative is estimated at $1.0 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would improve the transportation effectiveness of I-75 and I-575, allowing the facilities to accommodate additional traffic and contributing to the improved performance of the regional system. Improved movement of traffic would reduce emission of criteria air pollutants somewhat. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Development of the build alternative would result in 12 full and 59 partial acquisitions of property parcels, resulting in the displacement of six residences and six commercial properties including 11 businesses. Low-income and minority groups would be disproportionately affected by displacements. The project would require the relocation of 150 linear feet of stream, displacement of 0.3 acres of wetlands, and the placement of fill in 17 acres of floodplain. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity of well over 700 sensitive noise receptors. Construction workers could encounter eight hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0383D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100372, Volume 1--789 pages, Volume 2--76 pages (oversize maps), Technical Reports and Comments--12 volumes, September 10, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Environmental Justice KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Georgia KW - Executive Order 12898, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133683?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-09-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTHWEST+I-75%2FI-575+CORRIDOR%2C+COBB+AND+CHEROKEE+COUNTIES%2C+GEORGIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2007%29.&rft.title=NORTHWEST+I-75%2FI-575+CORRIDOR%2C+COBB+AND+CHEROKEE+COUNTIES%2C+GEORGIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2007%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Atlanta, Georgia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 10, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTHWEST I-75/I-575 CORRIDOR, COBB AND CHEROKEE COUNTIES, GEORGIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2007). [Part 1 of 9] T2 - NORTHWEST I-75/I-575 CORRIDOR, COBB AND CHEROKEE COUNTIES, GEORGIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2007). AN - 873133675; 14644-2_0001 AB - PURPOSE: Highway improvements for Interstate 75 (I-75) and I-575 in the Atlanta metropolitan area of Georgia are proposed. The Northwest Corridor study area, which extends from downtown Atlanta in Fulton County northwest into Cobb and Cherokee counties, encompasses a substantial portion of the region's population, including several low-income and Hispanic communities. The metropolitan area has experienced tremendous growth in population and employment since 1990, particularly in the Northwest Corridor. Five alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative, were considered in the draft EIS of May 2007. Substantial opposition and concern over anticipated costs for both the truck-only lane and bus rapid transit elements of the four build alternatives previously evaluated led to the decision in 2008 to eliminate the truck-only lanes and the bus rapid transit elements from further consideration. This supplemental draft EIS considers the No-Build Alternative and the Two-Lane Reversible Alternative which would involve constructing a tolled reversible managed-lane system on I-75 and I-575. The improvements would be made on I-75 from just south of the I-285 interchange at Akers Mill Road northwesterly to north of Hickory Grove Road and on I-575 from I-75 northeasterly to Sixes Road. The total length of proposed highway corridor improvements is about 27 miles. The proposed new managed lanes on I-75 would be reversible managed lanes that would only serve the peak period main direction of traffic flow. During the morning peak commute period, both lanes would accommodate southbound traffic. During the evening peak commute period, the directional flow of the traffic would be reversed to accommodate northbound traffic. At the I-75/I-575 interchange, the two reversible lanes would split and a single reversible lane would continue northwesterly on I-75 to north of Hickory Grove Road and northeasterly on I-575 to Sixes Road. In both cases, the single managed lane would be located in the existing highway medians. In addition, while the existing general-purpose lanes and shoulders may be relocated slightly, neither would be reduced in width. Like the two reversible lanes on I-75 south of the I-75/I-575 interchange, the single reversible lanes would only accommodate peak period directional flows. Vehicles would use both managed-lane interchanges and slip ramps to access the reversible lanes. A total of six managed-lane interchanges would be constructed on I-75 at: I-285, Terrell Mill Road, Roswell Road, I-575, Big Shanty Road and Hickory Grove Road. On I-575, three pairs of slip ramps would be constructed. These would generally be located near existing general-purpose interchanges at Barrett Parkway, Shallowford Road and Sixes Road. For safety reasons, the southbound managed-lane interchange on-ramps and managed-lane slip ramps would only allow vehicles to enter the reversible-lane system and travel southbound during the morning peak period. Similarly, the northbound managed-lane interchange on-ramps and managed-lane slip ramps would only allow vehicles to travel northbound in the evening peak period. Cost of the build alternative is estimated at $1.0 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would improve the transportation effectiveness of I-75 and I-575, allowing the facilities to accommodate additional traffic and contributing to the improved performance of the regional system. Improved movement of traffic would reduce emission of criteria air pollutants somewhat. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Development of the build alternative would result in 12 full and 59 partial acquisitions of property parcels, resulting in the displacement of six residences and six commercial properties including 11 businesses. Low-income and minority groups would be disproportionately affected by displacements. The project would require the relocation of 150 linear feet of stream, displacement of 0.3 acres of wetlands, and the placement of fill in 17 acres of floodplain. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity of well over 700 sensitive noise receptors. Construction workers could encounter eight hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0383D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100372, Volume 1--789 pages, Volume 2--76 pages (oversize maps), Technical Reports and Comments--12 volumes, September 10, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Environmental Justice KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Georgia KW - Executive Order 12898, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133675?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-09-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTHWEST+I-75%2FI-575+CORRIDOR%2C+COBB+AND+CHEROKEE+COUNTIES%2C+GEORGIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2007%29.&rft.title=NORTHWEST+I-75%2FI-575+CORRIDOR%2C+COBB+AND+CHEROKEE+COUNTIES%2C+GEORGIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2007%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Atlanta, Georgia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 10, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTHWEST I-75/I-575 CORRIDOR, COBB AND CHEROKEE COUNTIES, GEORGIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2007). [Part 3 of 9] T2 - NORTHWEST I-75/I-575 CORRIDOR, COBB AND CHEROKEE COUNTIES, GEORGIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2007). AN - 873133183; 14644-2_0003 AB - PURPOSE: Highway improvements for Interstate 75 (I-75) and I-575 in the Atlanta metropolitan area of Georgia are proposed. The Northwest Corridor study area, which extends from downtown Atlanta in Fulton County northwest into Cobb and Cherokee counties, encompasses a substantial portion of the region's population, including several low-income and Hispanic communities. The metropolitan area has experienced tremendous growth in population and employment since 1990, particularly in the Northwest Corridor. Five alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative, were considered in the draft EIS of May 2007. Substantial opposition and concern over anticipated costs for both the truck-only lane and bus rapid transit elements of the four build alternatives previously evaluated led to the decision in 2008 to eliminate the truck-only lanes and the bus rapid transit elements from further consideration. This supplemental draft EIS considers the No-Build Alternative and the Two-Lane Reversible Alternative which would involve constructing a tolled reversible managed-lane system on I-75 and I-575. The improvements would be made on I-75 from just south of the I-285 interchange at Akers Mill Road northwesterly to north of Hickory Grove Road and on I-575 from I-75 northeasterly to Sixes Road. The total length of proposed highway corridor improvements is about 27 miles. The proposed new managed lanes on I-75 would be reversible managed lanes that would only serve the peak period main direction of traffic flow. During the morning peak commute period, both lanes would accommodate southbound traffic. During the evening peak commute period, the directional flow of the traffic would be reversed to accommodate northbound traffic. At the I-75/I-575 interchange, the two reversible lanes would split and a single reversible lane would continue northwesterly on I-75 to north of Hickory Grove Road and northeasterly on I-575 to Sixes Road. In both cases, the single managed lane would be located in the existing highway medians. In addition, while the existing general-purpose lanes and shoulders may be relocated slightly, neither would be reduced in width. Like the two reversible lanes on I-75 south of the I-75/I-575 interchange, the single reversible lanes would only accommodate peak period directional flows. Vehicles would use both managed-lane interchanges and slip ramps to access the reversible lanes. A total of six managed-lane interchanges would be constructed on I-75 at: I-285, Terrell Mill Road, Roswell Road, I-575, Big Shanty Road and Hickory Grove Road. On I-575, three pairs of slip ramps would be constructed. These would generally be located near existing general-purpose interchanges at Barrett Parkway, Shallowford Road and Sixes Road. For safety reasons, the southbound managed-lane interchange on-ramps and managed-lane slip ramps would only allow vehicles to enter the reversible-lane system and travel southbound during the morning peak period. Similarly, the northbound managed-lane interchange on-ramps and managed-lane slip ramps would only allow vehicles to travel northbound in the evening peak period. Cost of the build alternative is estimated at $1.0 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would improve the transportation effectiveness of I-75 and I-575, allowing the facilities to accommodate additional traffic and contributing to the improved performance of the regional system. Improved movement of traffic would reduce emission of criteria air pollutants somewhat. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Development of the build alternative would result in 12 full and 59 partial acquisitions of property parcels, resulting in the displacement of six residences and six commercial properties including 11 businesses. Low-income and minority groups would be disproportionately affected by displacements. The project would require the relocation of 150 linear feet of stream, displacement of 0.3 acres of wetlands, and the placement of fill in 17 acres of floodplain. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity of well over 700 sensitive noise receptors. Construction workers could encounter eight hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0383D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100372, Volume 1--789 pages, Volume 2--76 pages (oversize maps), Technical Reports and Comments--12 volumes, September 10, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Environmental Justice KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Georgia KW - Executive Order 12898, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133183?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-09-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTHWEST+I-75%2FI-575+CORRIDOR%2C+COBB+AND+CHEROKEE+COUNTIES%2C+GEORGIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2007%29.&rft.title=NORTHWEST+I-75%2FI-575+CORRIDOR%2C+COBB+AND+CHEROKEE+COUNTIES%2C+GEORGIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2007%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Atlanta, Georgia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 10, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTHWEST I-75/I-575 CORRIDOR, COBB AND CHEROKEE COUNTIES, GEORGIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2007). [Part 4 of 9] T2 - NORTHWEST I-75/I-575 CORRIDOR, COBB AND CHEROKEE COUNTIES, GEORGIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2007). AN - 873132875; 14644-2_0004 AB - PURPOSE: Highway improvements for Interstate 75 (I-75) and I-575 in the Atlanta metropolitan area of Georgia are proposed. The Northwest Corridor study area, which extends from downtown Atlanta in Fulton County northwest into Cobb and Cherokee counties, encompasses a substantial portion of the region's population, including several low-income and Hispanic communities. The metropolitan area has experienced tremendous growth in population and employment since 1990, particularly in the Northwest Corridor. Five alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative, were considered in the draft EIS of May 2007. Substantial opposition and concern over anticipated costs for both the truck-only lane and bus rapid transit elements of the four build alternatives previously evaluated led to the decision in 2008 to eliminate the truck-only lanes and the bus rapid transit elements from further consideration. This supplemental draft EIS considers the No-Build Alternative and the Two-Lane Reversible Alternative which would involve constructing a tolled reversible managed-lane system on I-75 and I-575. The improvements would be made on I-75 from just south of the I-285 interchange at Akers Mill Road northwesterly to north of Hickory Grove Road and on I-575 from I-75 northeasterly to Sixes Road. The total length of proposed highway corridor improvements is about 27 miles. The proposed new managed lanes on I-75 would be reversible managed lanes that would only serve the peak period main direction of traffic flow. During the morning peak commute period, both lanes would accommodate southbound traffic. During the evening peak commute period, the directional flow of the traffic would be reversed to accommodate northbound traffic. At the I-75/I-575 interchange, the two reversible lanes would split and a single reversible lane would continue northwesterly on I-75 to north of Hickory Grove Road and northeasterly on I-575 to Sixes Road. In both cases, the single managed lane would be located in the existing highway medians. In addition, while the existing general-purpose lanes and shoulders may be relocated slightly, neither would be reduced in width. Like the two reversible lanes on I-75 south of the I-75/I-575 interchange, the single reversible lanes would only accommodate peak period directional flows. Vehicles would use both managed-lane interchanges and slip ramps to access the reversible lanes. A total of six managed-lane interchanges would be constructed on I-75 at: I-285, Terrell Mill Road, Roswell Road, I-575, Big Shanty Road and Hickory Grove Road. On I-575, three pairs of slip ramps would be constructed. These would generally be located near existing general-purpose interchanges at Barrett Parkway, Shallowford Road and Sixes Road. For safety reasons, the southbound managed-lane interchange on-ramps and managed-lane slip ramps would only allow vehicles to enter the reversible-lane system and travel southbound during the morning peak period. Similarly, the northbound managed-lane interchange on-ramps and managed-lane slip ramps would only allow vehicles to travel northbound in the evening peak period. Cost of the build alternative is estimated at $1.0 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would improve the transportation effectiveness of I-75 and I-575, allowing the facilities to accommodate additional traffic and contributing to the improved performance of the regional system. Improved movement of traffic would reduce emission of criteria air pollutants somewhat. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Development of the build alternative would result in 12 full and 59 partial acquisitions of property parcels, resulting in the displacement of six residences and six commercial properties including 11 businesses. Low-income and minority groups would be disproportionately affected by displacements. The project would require the relocation of 150 linear feet of stream, displacement of 0.3 acres of wetlands, and the placement of fill in 17 acres of floodplain. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity of well over 700 sensitive noise receptors. Construction workers could encounter eight hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0383D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100372, Volume 1--789 pages, Volume 2--76 pages (oversize maps), Technical Reports and Comments--12 volumes, September 10, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Environmental Justice KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Georgia KW - Executive Order 12898, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132875?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-09-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTHWEST+I-75%2FI-575+CORRIDOR%2C+COBB+AND+CHEROKEE+COUNTIES%2C+GEORGIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2007%29.&rft.title=NORTHWEST+I-75%2FI-575+CORRIDOR%2C+COBB+AND+CHEROKEE+COUNTIES%2C+GEORGIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2007%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Atlanta, Georgia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 10, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTHWEST I-75/I-575 CORRIDOR, COBB AND CHEROKEE COUNTIES, GEORGIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2007). [Part 9 of 9] T2 - NORTHWEST I-75/I-575 CORRIDOR, COBB AND CHEROKEE COUNTIES, GEORGIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2007). AN - 873131994; 14644-2_0009 AB - PURPOSE: Highway improvements for Interstate 75 (I-75) and I-575 in the Atlanta metropolitan area of Georgia are proposed. The Northwest Corridor study area, which extends from downtown Atlanta in Fulton County northwest into Cobb and Cherokee counties, encompasses a substantial portion of the region's population, including several low-income and Hispanic communities. The metropolitan area has experienced tremendous growth in population and employment since 1990, particularly in the Northwest Corridor. Five alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative, were considered in the draft EIS of May 2007. Substantial opposition and concern over anticipated costs for both the truck-only lane and bus rapid transit elements of the four build alternatives previously evaluated led to the decision in 2008 to eliminate the truck-only lanes and the bus rapid transit elements from further consideration. This supplemental draft EIS considers the No-Build Alternative and the Two-Lane Reversible Alternative which would involve constructing a tolled reversible managed-lane system on I-75 and I-575. The improvements would be made on I-75 from just south of the I-285 interchange at Akers Mill Road northwesterly to north of Hickory Grove Road and on I-575 from I-75 northeasterly to Sixes Road. The total length of proposed highway corridor improvements is about 27 miles. The proposed new managed lanes on I-75 would be reversible managed lanes that would only serve the peak period main direction of traffic flow. During the morning peak commute period, both lanes would accommodate southbound traffic. During the evening peak commute period, the directional flow of the traffic would be reversed to accommodate northbound traffic. At the I-75/I-575 interchange, the two reversible lanes would split and a single reversible lane would continue northwesterly on I-75 to north of Hickory Grove Road and northeasterly on I-575 to Sixes Road. In both cases, the single managed lane would be located in the existing highway medians. In addition, while the existing general-purpose lanes and shoulders may be relocated slightly, neither would be reduced in width. Like the two reversible lanes on I-75 south of the I-75/I-575 interchange, the single reversible lanes would only accommodate peak period directional flows. Vehicles would use both managed-lane interchanges and slip ramps to access the reversible lanes. A total of six managed-lane interchanges would be constructed on I-75 at: I-285, Terrell Mill Road, Roswell Road, I-575, Big Shanty Road and Hickory Grove Road. On I-575, three pairs of slip ramps would be constructed. These would generally be located near existing general-purpose interchanges at Barrett Parkway, Shallowford Road and Sixes Road. For safety reasons, the southbound managed-lane interchange on-ramps and managed-lane slip ramps would only allow vehicles to enter the reversible-lane system and travel southbound during the morning peak period. Similarly, the northbound managed-lane interchange on-ramps and managed-lane slip ramps would only allow vehicles to travel northbound in the evening peak period. Cost of the build alternative is estimated at $1.0 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would improve the transportation effectiveness of I-75 and I-575, allowing the facilities to accommodate additional traffic and contributing to the improved performance of the regional system. Improved movement of traffic would reduce emission of criteria air pollutants somewhat. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Development of the build alternative would result in 12 full and 59 partial acquisitions of property parcels, resulting in the displacement of six residences and six commercial properties including 11 businesses. Low-income and minority groups would be disproportionately affected by displacements. The project would require the relocation of 150 linear feet of stream, displacement of 0.3 acres of wetlands, and the placement of fill in 17 acres of floodplain. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity of well over 700 sensitive noise receptors. Construction workers could encounter eight hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0383D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100372, Volume 1--789 pages, Volume 2--76 pages (oversize maps), Technical Reports and Comments--12 volumes, September 10, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Environmental Justice KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Georgia KW - Executive Order 12898, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131994?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-09-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTHWEST+I-75%2FI-575+CORRIDOR%2C+COBB+AND+CHEROKEE+COUNTIES%2C+GEORGIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2007%29.&rft.title=NORTHWEST+I-75%2FI-575+CORRIDOR%2C+COBB+AND+CHEROKEE+COUNTIES%2C+GEORGIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2007%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Atlanta, Georgia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 10, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTHWEST I-75/I-575 CORRIDOR, COBB AND CHEROKEE COUNTIES, GEORGIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2007). [Part 2 of 9] T2 - NORTHWEST I-75/I-575 CORRIDOR, COBB AND CHEROKEE COUNTIES, GEORGIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2007). AN - 873131576; 14644-2_0002 AB - PURPOSE: Highway improvements for Interstate 75 (I-75) and I-575 in the Atlanta metropolitan area of Georgia are proposed. The Northwest Corridor study area, which extends from downtown Atlanta in Fulton County northwest into Cobb and Cherokee counties, encompasses a substantial portion of the region's population, including several low-income and Hispanic communities. The metropolitan area has experienced tremendous growth in population and employment since 1990, particularly in the Northwest Corridor. Five alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative, were considered in the draft EIS of May 2007. Substantial opposition and concern over anticipated costs for both the truck-only lane and bus rapid transit elements of the four build alternatives previously evaluated led to the decision in 2008 to eliminate the truck-only lanes and the bus rapid transit elements from further consideration. This supplemental draft EIS considers the No-Build Alternative and the Two-Lane Reversible Alternative which would involve constructing a tolled reversible managed-lane system on I-75 and I-575. The improvements would be made on I-75 from just south of the I-285 interchange at Akers Mill Road northwesterly to north of Hickory Grove Road and on I-575 from I-75 northeasterly to Sixes Road. The total length of proposed highway corridor improvements is about 27 miles. The proposed new managed lanes on I-75 would be reversible managed lanes that would only serve the peak period main direction of traffic flow. During the morning peak commute period, both lanes would accommodate southbound traffic. During the evening peak commute period, the directional flow of the traffic would be reversed to accommodate northbound traffic. At the I-75/I-575 interchange, the two reversible lanes would split and a single reversible lane would continue northwesterly on I-75 to north of Hickory Grove Road and northeasterly on I-575 to Sixes Road. In both cases, the single managed lane would be located in the existing highway medians. In addition, while the existing general-purpose lanes and shoulders may be relocated slightly, neither would be reduced in width. Like the two reversible lanes on I-75 south of the I-75/I-575 interchange, the single reversible lanes would only accommodate peak period directional flows. Vehicles would use both managed-lane interchanges and slip ramps to access the reversible lanes. A total of six managed-lane interchanges would be constructed on I-75 at: I-285, Terrell Mill Road, Roswell Road, I-575, Big Shanty Road and Hickory Grove Road. On I-575, three pairs of slip ramps would be constructed. These would generally be located near existing general-purpose interchanges at Barrett Parkway, Shallowford Road and Sixes Road. For safety reasons, the southbound managed-lane interchange on-ramps and managed-lane slip ramps would only allow vehicles to enter the reversible-lane system and travel southbound during the morning peak period. Similarly, the northbound managed-lane interchange on-ramps and managed-lane slip ramps would only allow vehicles to travel northbound in the evening peak period. Cost of the build alternative is estimated at $1.0 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would improve the transportation effectiveness of I-75 and I-575, allowing the facilities to accommodate additional traffic and contributing to the improved performance of the regional system. Improved movement of traffic would reduce emission of criteria air pollutants somewhat. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Development of the build alternative would result in 12 full and 59 partial acquisitions of property parcels, resulting in the displacement of six residences and six commercial properties including 11 businesses. Low-income and minority groups would be disproportionately affected by displacements. The project would require the relocation of 150 linear feet of stream, displacement of 0.3 acres of wetlands, and the placement of fill in 17 acres of floodplain. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity of well over 700 sensitive noise receptors. Construction workers could encounter eight hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0383D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100372, Volume 1--789 pages, Volume 2--76 pages (oversize maps), Technical Reports and Comments--12 volumes, September 10, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Environmental Justice KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Georgia KW - Executive Order 12898, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131576?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-09-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTHWEST+I-75%2FI-575+CORRIDOR%2C+COBB+AND+CHEROKEE+COUNTIES%2C+GEORGIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2007%29.&rft.title=NORTHWEST+I-75%2FI-575+CORRIDOR%2C+COBB+AND+CHEROKEE+COUNTIES%2C+GEORGIA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2007%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Atlanta, Georgia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 10, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTHWEST I-75/I-575 CORRIDOR, COBB AND CHEROKEE COUNTIES, GEORGIA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2007). AN - 759301389; 14644 AB - PURPOSE: Highway improvements for Interstate 75 (I-75) and I-575 in the Atlanta metropolitan area of Georgia are proposed. The Northwest Corridor study area, which extends from downtown Atlanta in Fulton County northwest into Cobb and Cherokee counties, encompasses a substantial portion of the region's population, including several low-income and Hispanic communities. The metropolitan area has experienced tremendous growth in population and employment since 1990, particularly in the Northwest Corridor. Five alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative, were considered in the draft EIS of May 2007. Substantial opposition and concern over anticipated costs for both the truck-only lane and bus rapid transit elements of the four build alternatives previously evaluated led to the decision in 2008 to eliminate the truck-only lanes and the bus rapid transit elements from further consideration. This supplemental draft EIS considers the No-Build Alternative and the Two-Lane Reversible Alternative which would involve constructing a tolled reversible managed-lane system on I-75 and I-575. The improvements would be made on I-75 from just south of the I-285 interchange at Akers Mill Road northwesterly to north of Hickory Grove Road and on I-575 from I-75 northeasterly to Sixes Road. The total length of proposed highway corridor improvements is about 27 miles. The proposed new managed lanes on I-75 would be reversible managed lanes that would only serve the peak period main direction of traffic flow. During the morning peak commute period, both lanes would accommodate southbound traffic. During the evening peak commute period, the directional flow of the traffic would be reversed to accommodate northbound traffic. At the I-75/I-575 interchange, the two reversible lanes would split and a single reversible lane would continue northwesterly on I-75 to north of Hickory Grove Road and northeasterly on I-575 to Sixes Road. In both cases, the single managed lane would be located in the existing highway medians. In addition, while the existing general-purpose lanes and shoulders may be relocated slightly, neither would be reduced in width. Like the two reversible lanes on I-75 south of the I-75/I-575 interchange, the single reversible lanes would only accommodate peak period directional flows. Vehicles would use both managed-lane interchanges and slip ramps to access the reversible lanes. A total of six managed-lane interchanges would be constructed on I-75 at: I-285, Terrell Mill Road, Roswell Road, I-575, Big Shanty Road and Hickory Grove Road. On I-575, three pairs of slip ramps would be constructed. These would generally be located near existing general-purpose interchanges at Barrett Parkway, Shallowford Road and Sixes Road. For safety reasons, the southbound managed-lane interchange on-ramps and managed-lane slip ramps would only allow vehicles to enter the reversible-lane system and travel southbound during the morning peak period. Similarly, the northbound managed-lane interchange on-ramps and managed-lane slip ramps would only allow vehicles to travel northbound in the evening peak period. Cost of the build alternative is estimated at $1.0 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would improve the transportation effectiveness of I-75 and I-575, allowing the facilities to accommodate additional traffic and contributing to the improved performance of the regional system. Improved movement of traffic would reduce emission of criteria air pollutants somewhat. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Development of the build alternative would result in 12 full and 59 partial acquisitions of property parcels, resulting in the displacement of six residences and six commercial properties including 11 businesses. Low-income and minority groups would be disproportionately affected by displacements. The project would require the relocation of 150 linear feet of stream, displacement of 0.3 acres of wetlands, and the placement of fill in 17 acres of floodplain. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity of well over 700 sensitive noise receptors. Construction workers could encounter eight hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0383D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100372, Volume 1--789 pages, Volume 2--76 pages (oversize maps), Technical Reports and Comments--12 volumes, September 10, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Environmental Justice KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Georgia KW - Executive Order 12898, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/759301389?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=1999-02-01&rft.volume=5&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=72&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Journal+of+Family+Nursing&rft.issn=10748407&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Atlanta, Georgia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 10, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 26/89/189/191 SOUTH OF JACKSON, TETON COUNTY, WYOMING. [Part 1 of 1] T2 - US 26/89/189/191 SOUTH OF JACKSON, TETON COUNTY, WYOMING. AN - 873133671; 14642-0_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The improvement of a 7.2-mile stretch of US 26/89/189/191 south of Jackson in Teton County, Wyoming is proposed. The project would extend from between mile posts 148.6 at the north end and 141.4 at the south end. The Snake River parallels the right-of-way through much of the southern portion of the study corridor. This section of highway constitutes a critical link within the region for commuters from Pinedale, Bondurant, and Alpine to access jobs and consumer outlets in Jackson. The highway is also heavily used by commercial vehicles as well as winter and summer tourist travelers. Varying widths of roadway along the corridor currently result in bottlenecks, exacerbating congestion and increasing risk of accidents. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are considered in this final EIS. The five-lane rural build alternative would provide for four 12-foot through lanes with one continuous 12-foot left-turn lane; the roadway would be flanked by eight-foot shoulders. The combination alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for a three-lane rural cross-section from mile post 141.4 to mile post 142.0 and a four-lane undivided cross-section from mile post 142.0 to mile post 142.5. The longest segment of this alternative, from mile post 142.5 to mile post 148.6, would consist of a five-lane rural highway. Both alternatives would require the replacement of a bridge crossing the Snake River floodplain. Both alternatives would also include a design element for construction of a separate pedestrian and bicycle pathway. Two pathway operations are considered. Under the preferred first option, the pathway would parallel the highway on the west side. Under the second option, the pathway would follow the same alignment from the northern study corridor terminus to Henry's Road South of Game Creek, where it would continue along Henry's Road to the point at which the road intersects with the highway near Horse Creek, at which point it would again share the same alignment as that of the first option. The typical pathway for each of the options would be 10 feet wide, but the pathway could be narrowed to eight feet in certain locations to minimize impacts to sensitive natural resources. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Widening the highway and maintaining a similar roadway width throughout the corridor would enhance system continuity, increase safety, and improve travel times. Accommodations for bicyclists and pedestrians would be improved. Anticipated residential and commercial growth in the Jackson area would be supported. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Development of 15.8 to 17.3 acres of new rights-of-way would displace 1.9 acres of farmland and, under the five-lane rural alternative, would displace three acres of land within the Teton County Scenic Preserve Trust. Impervious surface would be increased from 31.4 acres to either 68.8 acres or 71.4 acres. Vegetation losses would include 59.3 to 63.2 acres of mountain big sagebrush, 41.7 acres of riparian forest, and 1.6 acres of Douglas fir. The Game Creek archaeological site would be impacted. Either alternative would impact 13 wetlands, displacing 0.94 acres permanently. Bridge piers could be placed within the 100-year floodplain and channel of the Snake River. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0090D, Volume 33, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100370, Final EIS--825 pages, Technical Reports--CD-ROM, September 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-FEIS-08-01 KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Scenic Areas KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Snake River KW - Wyoming KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133671?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+26%2F89%2F189%2F191+SOUTH+OF+JACKSON%2C+TETON+COUNTY%2C+WYOMING.&rft.title=US+26%2F89%2F189%2F191+SOUTH+OF+JACKSON%2C+TETON+COUNTY%2C+WYOMING.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Cheyenne, Wyoming; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HERCULES INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 8 of 28] T2 - HERCULES INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133666; 14641-9_0008 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of an intermodal transit center (ITC), associated roadway improvements, and ancillary facilities at a site adjacent to San Pablo Bay in Contra Costa County, California is proposed. The area surrounding the proposed Hercules ITC site is being redeveloped with transit-oriented housing and business developments and construction of a ferry terminal is being considered. The Hercules ITC would include pedestrian access to the existing Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line and a newly constructed passenger platform. Train service would be available throughout most of the day with the Hercules ITC serving passengers traveling throughout the Bay area making connections with Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), local mass transit systems, and interconnecting trains going as far south as Los Angeles, and as far north as Sacramento and Oregon. Train passengers would be able to either walk from nearby residential units, bike along the multi-use path connection that is part of the proposed project, or park their motor vehicles in the parking lot that is part of the proposed project. Transit center patrons would also be able to access the site via public bus service that would be extended to the proposed Hercules ITC. The John Muir Parkway would be extended and two new bridges would be built over Refugio Creek to provide access to and circulation through the site. A temporary surface parking lot would be constructed immediately and a three-story park structure is included in the project as a future proposed action. In order to improve operation of the rail line, the UPRR track would be realigned to the east, away from San Pablo Bay, and a new railroad bridge would be constructed over Refugio Creek. The creek would also be realigned and the creek channel into San Pablo Bay would be dredged to improve flow during heavy rain events and high tides. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this draft EIS considers two action alternatives, one on the west side of Refugio Creek and the other on the east side. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The ITC would further the City of Hercules land use goals and improve access to public intercity rail and local buses for residents and workers. Providing access to public transit is also expected to reduce congestion on nearby Interstate 680, as well as local arterials. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities would create emissions of fugitive dust and criteria pollutants, impact northern coastal salt marsh and coastal brackish marsh habitats, result in the permanent fill of 2.65 acres of jurisdictional wetlands, and result in take of some wildlife species and in disturbance of sensitive bird and bat species. Dredging of Refugio Creek and San Pablo Bay could adversely impact water quality through mobilization of contaminated sediment. The alternative to build east of Refugio Creek would reduce the functionality of the adjacent properties and would require the threat of condemnation to acquire the site from a private party. The proposed project would move the Union Pacific tracks closer to sensitive receptors resulting in increased noise. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100369, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--531 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume 2)--652 pages, September 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bays KW - Creeks KW - Dredging KW - Ferries KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - San Pablo Bay KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133666?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HERCULES+INTERMODAL+TRANSIT+CENTER%2C+CONTRA+COSTA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=HERCULES+INTERMODAL+TRANSIT+CENTER%2C+CONTRA+COSTA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HERCULES INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 25 of 28] T2 - HERCULES INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132831; 14641-9_0025 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of an intermodal transit center (ITC), associated roadway improvements, and ancillary facilities at a site adjacent to San Pablo Bay in Contra Costa County, California is proposed. The area surrounding the proposed Hercules ITC site is being redeveloped with transit-oriented housing and business developments and construction of a ferry terminal is being considered. The Hercules ITC would include pedestrian access to the existing Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line and a newly constructed passenger platform. Train service would be available throughout most of the day with the Hercules ITC serving passengers traveling throughout the Bay area making connections with Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), local mass transit systems, and interconnecting trains going as far south as Los Angeles, and as far north as Sacramento and Oregon. Train passengers would be able to either walk from nearby residential units, bike along the multi-use path connection that is part of the proposed project, or park their motor vehicles in the parking lot that is part of the proposed project. Transit center patrons would also be able to access the site via public bus service that would be extended to the proposed Hercules ITC. The John Muir Parkway would be extended and two new bridges would be built over Refugio Creek to provide access to and circulation through the site. A temporary surface parking lot would be constructed immediately and a three-story park structure is included in the project as a future proposed action. In order to improve operation of the rail line, the UPRR track would be realigned to the east, away from San Pablo Bay, and a new railroad bridge would be constructed over Refugio Creek. The creek would also be realigned and the creek channel into San Pablo Bay would be dredged to improve flow during heavy rain events and high tides. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this draft EIS considers two action alternatives, one on the west side of Refugio Creek and the other on the east side. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The ITC would further the City of Hercules land use goals and improve access to public intercity rail and local buses for residents and workers. Providing access to public transit is also expected to reduce congestion on nearby Interstate 680, as well as local arterials. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities would create emissions of fugitive dust and criteria pollutants, impact northern coastal salt marsh and coastal brackish marsh habitats, result in the permanent fill of 2.65 acres of jurisdictional wetlands, and result in take of some wildlife species and in disturbance of sensitive bird and bat species. Dredging of Refugio Creek and San Pablo Bay could adversely impact water quality through mobilization of contaminated sediment. The alternative to build east of Refugio Creek would reduce the functionality of the adjacent properties and would require the threat of condemnation to acquire the site from a private party. The proposed project would move the Union Pacific tracks closer to sensitive receptors resulting in increased noise. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100369, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--531 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume 2)--652 pages, September 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 25 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bays KW - Creeks KW - Dredging KW - Ferries KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - San Pablo Bay KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132831?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HERCULES+INTERMODAL+TRANSIT+CENTER%2C+CONTRA+COSTA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=HERCULES+INTERMODAL+TRANSIT+CENTER%2C+CONTRA+COSTA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HERCULES INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 10 of 28] T2 - HERCULES INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132818; 14641-9_0010 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of an intermodal transit center (ITC), associated roadway improvements, and ancillary facilities at a site adjacent to San Pablo Bay in Contra Costa County, California is proposed. The area surrounding the proposed Hercules ITC site is being redeveloped with transit-oriented housing and business developments and construction of a ferry terminal is being considered. The Hercules ITC would include pedestrian access to the existing Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line and a newly constructed passenger platform. Train service would be available throughout most of the day with the Hercules ITC serving passengers traveling throughout the Bay area making connections with Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), local mass transit systems, and interconnecting trains going as far south as Los Angeles, and as far north as Sacramento and Oregon. Train passengers would be able to either walk from nearby residential units, bike along the multi-use path connection that is part of the proposed project, or park their motor vehicles in the parking lot that is part of the proposed project. Transit center patrons would also be able to access the site via public bus service that would be extended to the proposed Hercules ITC. The John Muir Parkway would be extended and two new bridges would be built over Refugio Creek to provide access to and circulation through the site. A temporary surface parking lot would be constructed immediately and a three-story park structure is included in the project as a future proposed action. In order to improve operation of the rail line, the UPRR track would be realigned to the east, away from San Pablo Bay, and a new railroad bridge would be constructed over Refugio Creek. The creek would also be realigned and the creek channel into San Pablo Bay would be dredged to improve flow during heavy rain events and high tides. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this draft EIS considers two action alternatives, one on the west side of Refugio Creek and the other on the east side. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The ITC would further the City of Hercules land use goals and improve access to public intercity rail and local buses for residents and workers. Providing access to public transit is also expected to reduce congestion on nearby Interstate 680, as well as local arterials. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities would create emissions of fugitive dust and criteria pollutants, impact northern coastal salt marsh and coastal brackish marsh habitats, result in the permanent fill of 2.65 acres of jurisdictional wetlands, and result in take of some wildlife species and in disturbance of sensitive bird and bat species. Dredging of Refugio Creek and San Pablo Bay could adversely impact water quality through mobilization of contaminated sediment. The alternative to build east of Refugio Creek would reduce the functionality of the adjacent properties and would require the threat of condemnation to acquire the site from a private party. The proposed project would move the Union Pacific tracks closer to sensitive receptors resulting in increased noise. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100369, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--531 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume 2)--652 pages, September 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bays KW - Creeks KW - Dredging KW - Ferries KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - San Pablo Bay KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132818?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HERCULES+INTERMODAL+TRANSIT+CENTER%2C+CONTRA+COSTA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=HERCULES+INTERMODAL+TRANSIT+CENTER%2C+CONTRA+COSTA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HERCULES INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 26 of 28] T2 - HERCULES INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132086; 14641-9_0026 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of an intermodal transit center (ITC), associated roadway improvements, and ancillary facilities at a site adjacent to San Pablo Bay in Contra Costa County, California is proposed. The area surrounding the proposed Hercules ITC site is being redeveloped with transit-oriented housing and business developments and construction of a ferry terminal is being considered. The Hercules ITC would include pedestrian access to the existing Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line and a newly constructed passenger platform. Train service would be available throughout most of the day with the Hercules ITC serving passengers traveling throughout the Bay area making connections with Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), local mass transit systems, and interconnecting trains going as far south as Los Angeles, and as far north as Sacramento and Oregon. Train passengers would be able to either walk from nearby residential units, bike along the multi-use path connection that is part of the proposed project, or park their motor vehicles in the parking lot that is part of the proposed project. Transit center patrons would also be able to access the site via public bus service that would be extended to the proposed Hercules ITC. The John Muir Parkway would be extended and two new bridges would be built over Refugio Creek to provide access to and circulation through the site. A temporary surface parking lot would be constructed immediately and a three-story park structure is included in the project as a future proposed action. In order to improve operation of the rail line, the UPRR track would be realigned to the east, away from San Pablo Bay, and a new railroad bridge would be constructed over Refugio Creek. The creek would also be realigned and the creek channel into San Pablo Bay would be dredged to improve flow during heavy rain events and high tides. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this draft EIS considers two action alternatives, one on the west side of Refugio Creek and the other on the east side. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The ITC would further the City of Hercules land use goals and improve access to public intercity rail and local buses for residents and workers. Providing access to public transit is also expected to reduce congestion on nearby Interstate 680, as well as local arterials. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities would create emissions of fugitive dust and criteria pollutants, impact northern coastal salt marsh and coastal brackish marsh habitats, result in the permanent fill of 2.65 acres of jurisdictional wetlands, and result in take of some wildlife species and in disturbance of sensitive bird and bat species. Dredging of Refugio Creek and San Pablo Bay could adversely impact water quality through mobilization of contaminated sediment. The alternative to build east of Refugio Creek would reduce the functionality of the adjacent properties and would require the threat of condemnation to acquire the site from a private party. The proposed project would move the Union Pacific tracks closer to sensitive receptors resulting in increased noise. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100369, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--531 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume 2)--652 pages, September 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 26 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bays KW - Creeks KW - Dredging KW - Ferries KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - San Pablo Bay KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132086?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HERCULES+INTERMODAL+TRANSIT+CENTER%2C+CONTRA+COSTA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=HERCULES+INTERMODAL+TRANSIT+CENTER%2C+CONTRA+COSTA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HERCULES INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 28 of 28] T2 - HERCULES INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131711; 14641-9_0028 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of an intermodal transit center (ITC), associated roadway improvements, and ancillary facilities at a site adjacent to San Pablo Bay in Contra Costa County, California is proposed. The area surrounding the proposed Hercules ITC site is being redeveloped with transit-oriented housing and business developments and construction of a ferry terminal is being considered. The Hercules ITC would include pedestrian access to the existing Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line and a newly constructed passenger platform. Train service would be available throughout most of the day with the Hercules ITC serving passengers traveling throughout the Bay area making connections with Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), local mass transit systems, and interconnecting trains going as far south as Los Angeles, and as far north as Sacramento and Oregon. Train passengers would be able to either walk from nearby residential units, bike along the multi-use path connection that is part of the proposed project, or park their motor vehicles in the parking lot that is part of the proposed project. Transit center patrons would also be able to access the site via public bus service that would be extended to the proposed Hercules ITC. The John Muir Parkway would be extended and two new bridges would be built over Refugio Creek to provide access to and circulation through the site. A temporary surface parking lot would be constructed immediately and a three-story park structure is included in the project as a future proposed action. In order to improve operation of the rail line, the UPRR track would be realigned to the east, away from San Pablo Bay, and a new railroad bridge would be constructed over Refugio Creek. The creek would also be realigned and the creek channel into San Pablo Bay would be dredged to improve flow during heavy rain events and high tides. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this draft EIS considers two action alternatives, one on the west side of Refugio Creek and the other on the east side. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The ITC would further the City of Hercules land use goals and improve access to public intercity rail and local buses for residents and workers. Providing access to public transit is also expected to reduce congestion on nearby Interstate 680, as well as local arterials. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities would create emissions of fugitive dust and criteria pollutants, impact northern coastal salt marsh and coastal brackish marsh habitats, result in the permanent fill of 2.65 acres of jurisdictional wetlands, and result in take of some wildlife species and in disturbance of sensitive bird and bat species. Dredging of Refugio Creek and San Pablo Bay could adversely impact water quality through mobilization of contaminated sediment. The alternative to build east of Refugio Creek would reduce the functionality of the adjacent properties and would require the threat of condemnation to acquire the site from a private party. The proposed project would move the Union Pacific tracks closer to sensitive receptors resulting in increased noise. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100369, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--531 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume 2)--652 pages, September 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 28 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bays KW - Creeks KW - Dredging KW - Ferries KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - San Pablo Bay KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131711?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HERCULES+INTERMODAL+TRANSIT+CENTER%2C+CONTRA+COSTA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=HERCULES+INTERMODAL+TRANSIT+CENTER%2C+CONTRA+COSTA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HERCULES INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 23 of 28] T2 - HERCULES INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131703; 14641-9_0023 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of an intermodal transit center (ITC), associated roadway improvements, and ancillary facilities at a site adjacent to San Pablo Bay in Contra Costa County, California is proposed. The area surrounding the proposed Hercules ITC site is being redeveloped with transit-oriented housing and business developments and construction of a ferry terminal is being considered. The Hercules ITC would include pedestrian access to the existing Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line and a newly constructed passenger platform. Train service would be available throughout most of the day with the Hercules ITC serving passengers traveling throughout the Bay area making connections with Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), local mass transit systems, and interconnecting trains going as far south as Los Angeles, and as far north as Sacramento and Oregon. Train passengers would be able to either walk from nearby residential units, bike along the multi-use path connection that is part of the proposed project, or park their motor vehicles in the parking lot that is part of the proposed project. Transit center patrons would also be able to access the site via public bus service that would be extended to the proposed Hercules ITC. The John Muir Parkway would be extended and two new bridges would be built over Refugio Creek to provide access to and circulation through the site. A temporary surface parking lot would be constructed immediately and a three-story park structure is included in the project as a future proposed action. In order to improve operation of the rail line, the UPRR track would be realigned to the east, away from San Pablo Bay, and a new railroad bridge would be constructed over Refugio Creek. The creek would also be realigned and the creek channel into San Pablo Bay would be dredged to improve flow during heavy rain events and high tides. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this draft EIS considers two action alternatives, one on the west side of Refugio Creek and the other on the east side. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The ITC would further the City of Hercules land use goals and improve access to public intercity rail and local buses for residents and workers. Providing access to public transit is also expected to reduce congestion on nearby Interstate 680, as well as local arterials. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities would create emissions of fugitive dust and criteria pollutants, impact northern coastal salt marsh and coastal brackish marsh habitats, result in the permanent fill of 2.65 acres of jurisdictional wetlands, and result in take of some wildlife species and in disturbance of sensitive bird and bat species. Dredging of Refugio Creek and San Pablo Bay could adversely impact water quality through mobilization of contaminated sediment. The alternative to build east of Refugio Creek would reduce the functionality of the adjacent properties and would require the threat of condemnation to acquire the site from a private party. The proposed project would move the Union Pacific tracks closer to sensitive receptors resulting in increased noise. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100369, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--531 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume 2)--652 pages, September 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 23 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bays KW - Creeks KW - Dredging KW - Ferries KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - San Pablo Bay KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131703?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HERCULES+INTERMODAL+TRANSIT+CENTER%2C+CONTRA+COSTA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=HERCULES+INTERMODAL+TRANSIT+CENTER%2C+CONTRA+COSTA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HERCULES INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 21 of 28] T2 - HERCULES INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131690; 14641-9_0021 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of an intermodal transit center (ITC), associated roadway improvements, and ancillary facilities at a site adjacent to San Pablo Bay in Contra Costa County, California is proposed. The area surrounding the proposed Hercules ITC site is being redeveloped with transit-oriented housing and business developments and construction of a ferry terminal is being considered. The Hercules ITC would include pedestrian access to the existing Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line and a newly constructed passenger platform. Train service would be available throughout most of the day with the Hercules ITC serving passengers traveling throughout the Bay area making connections with Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), local mass transit systems, and interconnecting trains going as far south as Los Angeles, and as far north as Sacramento and Oregon. Train passengers would be able to either walk from nearby residential units, bike along the multi-use path connection that is part of the proposed project, or park their motor vehicles in the parking lot that is part of the proposed project. Transit center patrons would also be able to access the site via public bus service that would be extended to the proposed Hercules ITC. The John Muir Parkway would be extended and two new bridges would be built over Refugio Creek to provide access to and circulation through the site. A temporary surface parking lot would be constructed immediately and a three-story park structure is included in the project as a future proposed action. In order to improve operation of the rail line, the UPRR track would be realigned to the east, away from San Pablo Bay, and a new railroad bridge would be constructed over Refugio Creek. The creek would also be realigned and the creek channel into San Pablo Bay would be dredged to improve flow during heavy rain events and high tides. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this draft EIS considers two action alternatives, one on the west side of Refugio Creek and the other on the east side. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The ITC would further the City of Hercules land use goals and improve access to public intercity rail and local buses for residents and workers. Providing access to public transit is also expected to reduce congestion on nearby Interstate 680, as well as local arterials. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities would create emissions of fugitive dust and criteria pollutants, impact northern coastal salt marsh and coastal brackish marsh habitats, result in the permanent fill of 2.65 acres of jurisdictional wetlands, and result in take of some wildlife species and in disturbance of sensitive bird and bat species. Dredging of Refugio Creek and San Pablo Bay could adversely impact water quality through mobilization of contaminated sediment. The alternative to build east of Refugio Creek would reduce the functionality of the adjacent properties and would require the threat of condemnation to acquire the site from a private party. The proposed project would move the Union Pacific tracks closer to sensitive receptors resulting in increased noise. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100369, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--531 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume 2)--652 pages, September 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 21 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bays KW - Creeks KW - Dredging KW - Ferries KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - San Pablo Bay KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131690?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HERCULES+INTERMODAL+TRANSIT+CENTER%2C+CONTRA+COSTA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=HERCULES+INTERMODAL+TRANSIT+CENTER%2C+CONTRA+COSTA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HERCULES INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 20 of 28] T2 - HERCULES INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873130258; 14641-9_0020 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of an intermodal transit center (ITC), associated roadway improvements, and ancillary facilities at a site adjacent to San Pablo Bay in Contra Costa County, California is proposed. The area surrounding the proposed Hercules ITC site is being redeveloped with transit-oriented housing and business developments and construction of a ferry terminal is being considered. The Hercules ITC would include pedestrian access to the existing Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line and a newly constructed passenger platform. Train service would be available throughout most of the day with the Hercules ITC serving passengers traveling throughout the Bay area making connections with Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), local mass transit systems, and interconnecting trains going as far south as Los Angeles, and as far north as Sacramento and Oregon. Train passengers would be able to either walk from nearby residential units, bike along the multi-use path connection that is part of the proposed project, or park their motor vehicles in the parking lot that is part of the proposed project. Transit center patrons would also be able to access the site via public bus service that would be extended to the proposed Hercules ITC. The John Muir Parkway would be extended and two new bridges would be built over Refugio Creek to provide access to and circulation through the site. A temporary surface parking lot would be constructed immediately and a three-story park structure is included in the project as a future proposed action. In order to improve operation of the rail line, the UPRR track would be realigned to the east, away from San Pablo Bay, and a new railroad bridge would be constructed over Refugio Creek. The creek would also be realigned and the creek channel into San Pablo Bay would be dredged to improve flow during heavy rain events and high tides. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this draft EIS considers two action alternatives, one on the west side of Refugio Creek and the other on the east side. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The ITC would further the City of Hercules land use goals and improve access to public intercity rail and local buses for residents and workers. Providing access to public transit is also expected to reduce congestion on nearby Interstate 680, as well as local arterials. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities would create emissions of fugitive dust and criteria pollutants, impact northern coastal salt marsh and coastal brackish marsh habitats, result in the permanent fill of 2.65 acres of jurisdictional wetlands, and result in take of some wildlife species and in disturbance of sensitive bird and bat species. Dredging of Refugio Creek and San Pablo Bay could adversely impact water quality through mobilization of contaminated sediment. The alternative to build east of Refugio Creek would reduce the functionality of the adjacent properties and would require the threat of condemnation to acquire the site from a private party. The proposed project would move the Union Pacific tracks closer to sensitive receptors resulting in increased noise. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100369, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--531 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume 2)--652 pages, September 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 20 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bays KW - Creeks KW - Dredging KW - Ferries KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - San Pablo Bay KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130258?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HERCULES+INTERMODAL+TRANSIT+CENTER%2C+CONTRA+COSTA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=HERCULES+INTERMODAL+TRANSIT+CENTER%2C+CONTRA+COSTA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HERCULES INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 19 of 28] T2 - HERCULES INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873130240; 14641-9_0019 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of an intermodal transit center (ITC), associated roadway improvements, and ancillary facilities at a site adjacent to San Pablo Bay in Contra Costa County, California is proposed. The area surrounding the proposed Hercules ITC site is being redeveloped with transit-oriented housing and business developments and construction of a ferry terminal is being considered. The Hercules ITC would include pedestrian access to the existing Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line and a newly constructed passenger platform. Train service would be available throughout most of the day with the Hercules ITC serving passengers traveling throughout the Bay area making connections with Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), local mass transit systems, and interconnecting trains going as far south as Los Angeles, and as far north as Sacramento and Oregon. Train passengers would be able to either walk from nearby residential units, bike along the multi-use path connection that is part of the proposed project, or park their motor vehicles in the parking lot that is part of the proposed project. Transit center patrons would also be able to access the site via public bus service that would be extended to the proposed Hercules ITC. The John Muir Parkway would be extended and two new bridges would be built over Refugio Creek to provide access to and circulation through the site. A temporary surface parking lot would be constructed immediately and a three-story park structure is included in the project as a future proposed action. In order to improve operation of the rail line, the UPRR track would be realigned to the east, away from San Pablo Bay, and a new railroad bridge would be constructed over Refugio Creek. The creek would also be realigned and the creek channel into San Pablo Bay would be dredged to improve flow during heavy rain events and high tides. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this draft EIS considers two action alternatives, one on the west side of Refugio Creek and the other on the east side. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The ITC would further the City of Hercules land use goals and improve access to public intercity rail and local buses for residents and workers. Providing access to public transit is also expected to reduce congestion on nearby Interstate 680, as well as local arterials. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities would create emissions of fugitive dust and criteria pollutants, impact northern coastal salt marsh and coastal brackish marsh habitats, result in the permanent fill of 2.65 acres of jurisdictional wetlands, and result in take of some wildlife species and in disturbance of sensitive bird and bat species. Dredging of Refugio Creek and San Pablo Bay could adversely impact water quality through mobilization of contaminated sediment. The alternative to build east of Refugio Creek would reduce the functionality of the adjacent properties and would require the threat of condemnation to acquire the site from a private party. The proposed project would move the Union Pacific tracks closer to sensitive receptors resulting in increased noise. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100369, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--531 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume 2)--652 pages, September 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 19 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bays KW - Creeks KW - Dredging KW - Ferries KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - San Pablo Bay KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130240?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HERCULES+INTERMODAL+TRANSIT+CENTER%2C+CONTRA+COSTA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=HERCULES+INTERMODAL+TRANSIT+CENTER%2C+CONTRA+COSTA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HERCULES INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 11 of 28] T2 - HERCULES INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873129963; 14641-9_0011 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of an intermodal transit center (ITC), associated roadway improvements, and ancillary facilities at a site adjacent to San Pablo Bay in Contra Costa County, California is proposed. The area surrounding the proposed Hercules ITC site is being redeveloped with transit-oriented housing and business developments and construction of a ferry terminal is being considered. The Hercules ITC would include pedestrian access to the existing Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line and a newly constructed passenger platform. Train service would be available throughout most of the day with the Hercules ITC serving passengers traveling throughout the Bay area making connections with Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), local mass transit systems, and interconnecting trains going as far south as Los Angeles, and as far north as Sacramento and Oregon. Train passengers would be able to either walk from nearby residential units, bike along the multi-use path connection that is part of the proposed project, or park their motor vehicles in the parking lot that is part of the proposed project. Transit center patrons would also be able to access the site via public bus service that would be extended to the proposed Hercules ITC. The John Muir Parkway would be extended and two new bridges would be built over Refugio Creek to provide access to and circulation through the site. A temporary surface parking lot would be constructed immediately and a three-story park structure is included in the project as a future proposed action. In order to improve operation of the rail line, the UPRR track would be realigned to the east, away from San Pablo Bay, and a new railroad bridge would be constructed over Refugio Creek. The creek would also be realigned and the creek channel into San Pablo Bay would be dredged to improve flow during heavy rain events and high tides. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this draft EIS considers two action alternatives, one on the west side of Refugio Creek and the other on the east side. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The ITC would further the City of Hercules land use goals and improve access to public intercity rail and local buses for residents and workers. Providing access to public transit is also expected to reduce congestion on nearby Interstate 680, as well as local arterials. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities would create emissions of fugitive dust and criteria pollutants, impact northern coastal salt marsh and coastal brackish marsh habitats, result in the permanent fill of 2.65 acres of jurisdictional wetlands, and result in take of some wildlife species and in disturbance of sensitive bird and bat species. Dredging of Refugio Creek and San Pablo Bay could adversely impact water quality through mobilization of contaminated sediment. The alternative to build east of Refugio Creek would reduce the functionality of the adjacent properties and would require the threat of condemnation to acquire the site from a private party. The proposed project would move the Union Pacific tracks closer to sensitive receptors resulting in increased noise. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100369, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--531 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume 2)--652 pages, September 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bays KW - Creeks KW - Dredging KW - Ferries KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - San Pablo Bay KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129963?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HERCULES+INTERMODAL+TRANSIT+CENTER%2C+CONTRA+COSTA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=HERCULES+INTERMODAL+TRANSIT+CENTER%2C+CONTRA+COSTA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HERCULES INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 6 of 28] T2 - HERCULES INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873129902; 14641-9_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of an intermodal transit center (ITC), associated roadway improvements, and ancillary facilities at a site adjacent to San Pablo Bay in Contra Costa County, California is proposed. The area surrounding the proposed Hercules ITC site is being redeveloped with transit-oriented housing and business developments and construction of a ferry terminal is being considered. The Hercules ITC would include pedestrian access to the existing Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line and a newly constructed passenger platform. Train service would be available throughout most of the day with the Hercules ITC serving passengers traveling throughout the Bay area making connections with Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), local mass transit systems, and interconnecting trains going as far south as Los Angeles, and as far north as Sacramento and Oregon. Train passengers would be able to either walk from nearby residential units, bike along the multi-use path connection that is part of the proposed project, or park their motor vehicles in the parking lot that is part of the proposed project. Transit center patrons would also be able to access the site via public bus service that would be extended to the proposed Hercules ITC. The John Muir Parkway would be extended and two new bridges would be built over Refugio Creek to provide access to and circulation through the site. A temporary surface parking lot would be constructed immediately and a three-story park structure is included in the project as a future proposed action. In order to improve operation of the rail line, the UPRR track would be realigned to the east, away from San Pablo Bay, and a new railroad bridge would be constructed over Refugio Creek. The creek would also be realigned and the creek channel into San Pablo Bay would be dredged to improve flow during heavy rain events and high tides. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this draft EIS considers two action alternatives, one on the west side of Refugio Creek and the other on the east side. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The ITC would further the City of Hercules land use goals and improve access to public intercity rail and local buses for residents and workers. Providing access to public transit is also expected to reduce congestion on nearby Interstate 680, as well as local arterials. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities would create emissions of fugitive dust and criteria pollutants, impact northern coastal salt marsh and coastal brackish marsh habitats, result in the permanent fill of 2.65 acres of jurisdictional wetlands, and result in take of some wildlife species and in disturbance of sensitive bird and bat species. Dredging of Refugio Creek and San Pablo Bay could adversely impact water quality through mobilization of contaminated sediment. The alternative to build east of Refugio Creek would reduce the functionality of the adjacent properties and would require the threat of condemnation to acquire the site from a private party. The proposed project would move the Union Pacific tracks closer to sensitive receptors resulting in increased noise. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100369, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--531 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume 2)--652 pages, September 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bays KW - Creeks KW - Dredging KW - Ferries KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - San Pablo Bay KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129902?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HERCULES+INTERMODAL+TRANSIT+CENTER%2C+CONTRA+COSTA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=HERCULES+INTERMODAL+TRANSIT+CENTER%2C+CONTRA+COSTA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HERCULES INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 5 of 28] T2 - HERCULES INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873129891; 14641-9_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of an intermodal transit center (ITC), associated roadway improvements, and ancillary facilities at a site adjacent to San Pablo Bay in Contra Costa County, California is proposed. The area surrounding the proposed Hercules ITC site is being redeveloped with transit-oriented housing and business developments and construction of a ferry terminal is being considered. The Hercules ITC would include pedestrian access to the existing Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line and a newly constructed passenger platform. Train service would be available throughout most of the day with the Hercules ITC serving passengers traveling throughout the Bay area making connections with Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), local mass transit systems, and interconnecting trains going as far south as Los Angeles, and as far north as Sacramento and Oregon. Train passengers would be able to either walk from nearby residential units, bike along the multi-use path connection that is part of the proposed project, or park their motor vehicles in the parking lot that is part of the proposed project. Transit center patrons would also be able to access the site via public bus service that would be extended to the proposed Hercules ITC. The John Muir Parkway would be extended and two new bridges would be built over Refugio Creek to provide access to and circulation through the site. A temporary surface parking lot would be constructed immediately and a three-story park structure is included in the project as a future proposed action. In order to improve operation of the rail line, the UPRR track would be realigned to the east, away from San Pablo Bay, and a new railroad bridge would be constructed over Refugio Creek. The creek would also be realigned and the creek channel into San Pablo Bay would be dredged to improve flow during heavy rain events and high tides. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this draft EIS considers two action alternatives, one on the west side of Refugio Creek and the other on the east side. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The ITC would further the City of Hercules land use goals and improve access to public intercity rail and local buses for residents and workers. Providing access to public transit is also expected to reduce congestion on nearby Interstate 680, as well as local arterials. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities would create emissions of fugitive dust and criteria pollutants, impact northern coastal salt marsh and coastal brackish marsh habitats, result in the permanent fill of 2.65 acres of jurisdictional wetlands, and result in take of some wildlife species and in disturbance of sensitive bird and bat species. Dredging of Refugio Creek and San Pablo Bay could adversely impact water quality through mobilization of contaminated sediment. The alternative to build east of Refugio Creek would reduce the functionality of the adjacent properties and would require the threat of condemnation to acquire the site from a private party. The proposed project would move the Union Pacific tracks closer to sensitive receptors resulting in increased noise. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100369, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--531 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume 2)--652 pages, September 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bays KW - Creeks KW - Dredging KW - Ferries KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - San Pablo Bay KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129891?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HERCULES+INTERMODAL+TRANSIT+CENTER%2C+CONTRA+COSTA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=HERCULES+INTERMODAL+TRANSIT+CENTER%2C+CONTRA+COSTA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HERCULES INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 4 of 28] T2 - HERCULES INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873129875; 14641-9_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of an intermodal transit center (ITC), associated roadway improvements, and ancillary facilities at a site adjacent to San Pablo Bay in Contra Costa County, California is proposed. The area surrounding the proposed Hercules ITC site is being redeveloped with transit-oriented housing and business developments and construction of a ferry terminal is being considered. The Hercules ITC would include pedestrian access to the existing Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line and a newly constructed passenger platform. Train service would be available throughout most of the day with the Hercules ITC serving passengers traveling throughout the Bay area making connections with Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), local mass transit systems, and interconnecting trains going as far south as Los Angeles, and as far north as Sacramento and Oregon. Train passengers would be able to either walk from nearby residential units, bike along the multi-use path connection that is part of the proposed project, or park their motor vehicles in the parking lot that is part of the proposed project. Transit center patrons would also be able to access the site via public bus service that would be extended to the proposed Hercules ITC. The John Muir Parkway would be extended and two new bridges would be built over Refugio Creek to provide access to and circulation through the site. A temporary surface parking lot would be constructed immediately and a three-story park structure is included in the project as a future proposed action. In order to improve operation of the rail line, the UPRR track would be realigned to the east, away from San Pablo Bay, and a new railroad bridge would be constructed over Refugio Creek. The creek would also be realigned and the creek channel into San Pablo Bay would be dredged to improve flow during heavy rain events and high tides. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this draft EIS considers two action alternatives, one on the west side of Refugio Creek and the other on the east side. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The ITC would further the City of Hercules land use goals and improve access to public intercity rail and local buses for residents and workers. Providing access to public transit is also expected to reduce congestion on nearby Interstate 680, as well as local arterials. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities would create emissions of fugitive dust and criteria pollutants, impact northern coastal salt marsh and coastal brackish marsh habitats, result in the permanent fill of 2.65 acres of jurisdictional wetlands, and result in take of some wildlife species and in disturbance of sensitive bird and bat species. Dredging of Refugio Creek and San Pablo Bay could adversely impact water quality through mobilization of contaminated sediment. The alternative to build east of Refugio Creek would reduce the functionality of the adjacent properties and would require the threat of condemnation to acquire the site from a private party. The proposed project would move the Union Pacific tracks closer to sensitive receptors resulting in increased noise. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100369, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--531 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume 2)--652 pages, September 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bays KW - Creeks KW - Dredging KW - Ferries KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - San Pablo Bay KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129875?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HERCULES+INTERMODAL+TRANSIT+CENTER%2C+CONTRA+COSTA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=HERCULES+INTERMODAL+TRANSIT+CENTER%2C+CONTRA+COSTA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HERCULES INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 3 of 28] T2 - HERCULES INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873129858; 14641-9_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of an intermodal transit center (ITC), associated roadway improvements, and ancillary facilities at a site adjacent to San Pablo Bay in Contra Costa County, California is proposed. The area surrounding the proposed Hercules ITC site is being redeveloped with transit-oriented housing and business developments and construction of a ferry terminal is being considered. The Hercules ITC would include pedestrian access to the existing Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line and a newly constructed passenger platform. Train service would be available throughout most of the day with the Hercules ITC serving passengers traveling throughout the Bay area making connections with Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), local mass transit systems, and interconnecting trains going as far south as Los Angeles, and as far north as Sacramento and Oregon. Train passengers would be able to either walk from nearby residential units, bike along the multi-use path connection that is part of the proposed project, or park their motor vehicles in the parking lot that is part of the proposed project. Transit center patrons would also be able to access the site via public bus service that would be extended to the proposed Hercules ITC. The John Muir Parkway would be extended and two new bridges would be built over Refugio Creek to provide access to and circulation through the site. A temporary surface parking lot would be constructed immediately and a three-story park structure is included in the project as a future proposed action. In order to improve operation of the rail line, the UPRR track would be realigned to the east, away from San Pablo Bay, and a new railroad bridge would be constructed over Refugio Creek. The creek would also be realigned and the creek channel into San Pablo Bay would be dredged to improve flow during heavy rain events and high tides. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this draft EIS considers two action alternatives, one on the west side of Refugio Creek and the other on the east side. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The ITC would further the City of Hercules land use goals and improve access to public intercity rail and local buses for residents and workers. Providing access to public transit is also expected to reduce congestion on nearby Interstate 680, as well as local arterials. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities would create emissions of fugitive dust and criteria pollutants, impact northern coastal salt marsh and coastal brackish marsh habitats, result in the permanent fill of 2.65 acres of jurisdictional wetlands, and result in take of some wildlife species and in disturbance of sensitive bird and bat species. Dredging of Refugio Creek and San Pablo Bay could adversely impact water quality through mobilization of contaminated sediment. The alternative to build east of Refugio Creek would reduce the functionality of the adjacent properties and would require the threat of condemnation to acquire the site from a private party. The proposed project would move the Union Pacific tracks closer to sensitive receptors resulting in increased noise. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100369, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--531 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume 2)--652 pages, September 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bays KW - Creeks KW - Dredging KW - Ferries KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - San Pablo Bay KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129858?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HERCULES+INTERMODAL+TRANSIT+CENTER%2C+CONTRA+COSTA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=HERCULES+INTERMODAL+TRANSIT+CENTER%2C+CONTRA+COSTA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HERCULES INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 2 of 28] T2 - HERCULES INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873129850; 14641-9_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of an intermodal transit center (ITC), associated roadway improvements, and ancillary facilities at a site adjacent to San Pablo Bay in Contra Costa County, California is proposed. The area surrounding the proposed Hercules ITC site is being redeveloped with transit-oriented housing and business developments and construction of a ferry terminal is being considered. The Hercules ITC would include pedestrian access to the existing Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line and a newly constructed passenger platform. Train service would be available throughout most of the day with the Hercules ITC serving passengers traveling throughout the Bay area making connections with Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), local mass transit systems, and interconnecting trains going as far south as Los Angeles, and as far north as Sacramento and Oregon. Train passengers would be able to either walk from nearby residential units, bike along the multi-use path connection that is part of the proposed project, or park their motor vehicles in the parking lot that is part of the proposed project. Transit center patrons would also be able to access the site via public bus service that would be extended to the proposed Hercules ITC. The John Muir Parkway would be extended and two new bridges would be built over Refugio Creek to provide access to and circulation through the site. A temporary surface parking lot would be constructed immediately and a three-story park structure is included in the project as a future proposed action. In order to improve operation of the rail line, the UPRR track would be realigned to the east, away from San Pablo Bay, and a new railroad bridge would be constructed over Refugio Creek. The creek would also be realigned and the creek channel into San Pablo Bay would be dredged to improve flow during heavy rain events and high tides. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this draft EIS considers two action alternatives, one on the west side of Refugio Creek and the other on the east side. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The ITC would further the City of Hercules land use goals and improve access to public intercity rail and local buses for residents and workers. Providing access to public transit is also expected to reduce congestion on nearby Interstate 680, as well as local arterials. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities would create emissions of fugitive dust and criteria pollutants, impact northern coastal salt marsh and coastal brackish marsh habitats, result in the permanent fill of 2.65 acres of jurisdictional wetlands, and result in take of some wildlife species and in disturbance of sensitive bird and bat species. Dredging of Refugio Creek and San Pablo Bay could adversely impact water quality through mobilization of contaminated sediment. The alternative to build east of Refugio Creek would reduce the functionality of the adjacent properties and would require the threat of condemnation to acquire the site from a private party. The proposed project would move the Union Pacific tracks closer to sensitive receptors resulting in increased noise. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100369, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--531 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume 2)--652 pages, September 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bays KW - Creeks KW - Dredging KW - Ferries KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - San Pablo Bay KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129850?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HERCULES+INTERMODAL+TRANSIT+CENTER%2C+CONTRA+COSTA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=HERCULES+INTERMODAL+TRANSIT+CENTER%2C+CONTRA+COSTA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HERCULES INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 1 of 28] T2 - HERCULES INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873129838; 14641-9_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of an intermodal transit center (ITC), associated roadway improvements, and ancillary facilities at a site adjacent to San Pablo Bay in Contra Costa County, California is proposed. The area surrounding the proposed Hercules ITC site is being redeveloped with transit-oriented housing and business developments and construction of a ferry terminal is being considered. The Hercules ITC would include pedestrian access to the existing Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line and a newly constructed passenger platform. Train service would be available throughout most of the day with the Hercules ITC serving passengers traveling throughout the Bay area making connections with Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), local mass transit systems, and interconnecting trains going as far south as Los Angeles, and as far north as Sacramento and Oregon. Train passengers would be able to either walk from nearby residential units, bike along the multi-use path connection that is part of the proposed project, or park their motor vehicles in the parking lot that is part of the proposed project. Transit center patrons would also be able to access the site via public bus service that would be extended to the proposed Hercules ITC. The John Muir Parkway would be extended and two new bridges would be built over Refugio Creek to provide access to and circulation through the site. A temporary surface parking lot would be constructed immediately and a three-story park structure is included in the project as a future proposed action. In order to improve operation of the rail line, the UPRR track would be realigned to the east, away from San Pablo Bay, and a new railroad bridge would be constructed over Refugio Creek. The creek would also be realigned and the creek channel into San Pablo Bay would be dredged to improve flow during heavy rain events and high tides. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this draft EIS considers two action alternatives, one on the west side of Refugio Creek and the other on the east side. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The ITC would further the City of Hercules land use goals and improve access to public intercity rail and local buses for residents and workers. Providing access to public transit is also expected to reduce congestion on nearby Interstate 680, as well as local arterials. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities would create emissions of fugitive dust and criteria pollutants, impact northern coastal salt marsh and coastal brackish marsh habitats, result in the permanent fill of 2.65 acres of jurisdictional wetlands, and result in take of some wildlife species and in disturbance of sensitive bird and bat species. Dredging of Refugio Creek and San Pablo Bay could adversely impact water quality through mobilization of contaminated sediment. The alternative to build east of Refugio Creek would reduce the functionality of the adjacent properties and would require the threat of condemnation to acquire the site from a private party. The proposed project would move the Union Pacific tracks closer to sensitive receptors resulting in increased noise. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100369, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--531 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume 2)--652 pages, September 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bays KW - Creeks KW - Dredging KW - Ferries KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - San Pablo Bay KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129838?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HERCULES+INTERMODAL+TRANSIT+CENTER%2C+CONTRA+COSTA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=HERCULES+INTERMODAL+TRANSIT+CENTER%2C+CONTRA+COSTA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HERCULES INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 17 of 28] T2 - HERCULES INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873129318; 14641-9_0017 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of an intermodal transit center (ITC), associated roadway improvements, and ancillary facilities at a site adjacent to San Pablo Bay in Contra Costa County, California is proposed. The area surrounding the proposed Hercules ITC site is being redeveloped with transit-oriented housing and business developments and construction of a ferry terminal is being considered. The Hercules ITC would include pedestrian access to the existing Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line and a newly constructed passenger platform. Train service would be available throughout most of the day with the Hercules ITC serving passengers traveling throughout the Bay area making connections with Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), local mass transit systems, and interconnecting trains going as far south as Los Angeles, and as far north as Sacramento and Oregon. Train passengers would be able to either walk from nearby residential units, bike along the multi-use path connection that is part of the proposed project, or park their motor vehicles in the parking lot that is part of the proposed project. Transit center patrons would also be able to access the site via public bus service that would be extended to the proposed Hercules ITC. The John Muir Parkway would be extended and two new bridges would be built over Refugio Creek to provide access to and circulation through the site. A temporary surface parking lot would be constructed immediately and a three-story park structure is included in the project as a future proposed action. In order to improve operation of the rail line, the UPRR track would be realigned to the east, away from San Pablo Bay, and a new railroad bridge would be constructed over Refugio Creek. The creek would also be realigned and the creek channel into San Pablo Bay would be dredged to improve flow during heavy rain events and high tides. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this draft EIS considers two action alternatives, one on the west side of Refugio Creek and the other on the east side. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The ITC would further the City of Hercules land use goals and improve access to public intercity rail and local buses for residents and workers. Providing access to public transit is also expected to reduce congestion on nearby Interstate 680, as well as local arterials. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities would create emissions of fugitive dust and criteria pollutants, impact northern coastal salt marsh and coastal brackish marsh habitats, result in the permanent fill of 2.65 acres of jurisdictional wetlands, and result in take of some wildlife species and in disturbance of sensitive bird and bat species. Dredging of Refugio Creek and San Pablo Bay could adversely impact water quality through mobilization of contaminated sediment. The alternative to build east of Refugio Creek would reduce the functionality of the adjacent properties and would require the threat of condemnation to acquire the site from a private party. The proposed project would move the Union Pacific tracks closer to sensitive receptors resulting in increased noise. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100369, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--531 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume 2)--652 pages, September 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 17 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bays KW - Creeks KW - Dredging KW - Ferries KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - San Pablo Bay KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129318?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HERCULES+INTERMODAL+TRANSIT+CENTER%2C+CONTRA+COSTA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=HERCULES+INTERMODAL+TRANSIT+CENTER%2C+CONTRA+COSTA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HERCULES INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 16 of 28] T2 - HERCULES INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873129300; 14641-9_0016 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of an intermodal transit center (ITC), associated roadway improvements, and ancillary facilities at a site adjacent to San Pablo Bay in Contra Costa County, California is proposed. The area surrounding the proposed Hercules ITC site is being redeveloped with transit-oriented housing and business developments and construction of a ferry terminal is being considered. The Hercules ITC would include pedestrian access to the existing Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line and a newly constructed passenger platform. Train service would be available throughout most of the day with the Hercules ITC serving passengers traveling throughout the Bay area making connections with Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), local mass transit systems, and interconnecting trains going as far south as Los Angeles, and as far north as Sacramento and Oregon. Train passengers would be able to either walk from nearby residential units, bike along the multi-use path connection that is part of the proposed project, or park their motor vehicles in the parking lot that is part of the proposed project. Transit center patrons would also be able to access the site via public bus service that would be extended to the proposed Hercules ITC. The John Muir Parkway would be extended and two new bridges would be built over Refugio Creek to provide access to and circulation through the site. A temporary surface parking lot would be constructed immediately and a three-story park structure is included in the project as a future proposed action. In order to improve operation of the rail line, the UPRR track would be realigned to the east, away from San Pablo Bay, and a new railroad bridge would be constructed over Refugio Creek. The creek would also be realigned and the creek channel into San Pablo Bay would be dredged to improve flow during heavy rain events and high tides. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this draft EIS considers two action alternatives, one on the west side of Refugio Creek and the other on the east side. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The ITC would further the City of Hercules land use goals and improve access to public intercity rail and local buses for residents and workers. Providing access to public transit is also expected to reduce congestion on nearby Interstate 680, as well as local arterials. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities would create emissions of fugitive dust and criteria pollutants, impact northern coastal salt marsh and coastal brackish marsh habitats, result in the permanent fill of 2.65 acres of jurisdictional wetlands, and result in take of some wildlife species and in disturbance of sensitive bird and bat species. Dredging of Refugio Creek and San Pablo Bay could adversely impact water quality through mobilization of contaminated sediment. The alternative to build east of Refugio Creek would reduce the functionality of the adjacent properties and would require the threat of condemnation to acquire the site from a private party. The proposed project would move the Union Pacific tracks closer to sensitive receptors resulting in increased noise. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100369, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--531 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume 2)--652 pages, September 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 16 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bays KW - Creeks KW - Dredging KW - Ferries KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - San Pablo Bay KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129300?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HERCULES+INTERMODAL+TRANSIT+CENTER%2C+CONTRA+COSTA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=HERCULES+INTERMODAL+TRANSIT+CENTER%2C+CONTRA+COSTA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HERCULES INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 15 of 28] T2 - HERCULES INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873129287; 14641-9_0015 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of an intermodal transit center (ITC), associated roadway improvements, and ancillary facilities at a site adjacent to San Pablo Bay in Contra Costa County, California is proposed. The area surrounding the proposed Hercules ITC site is being redeveloped with transit-oriented housing and business developments and construction of a ferry terminal is being considered. The Hercules ITC would include pedestrian access to the existing Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line and a newly constructed passenger platform. Train service would be available throughout most of the day with the Hercules ITC serving passengers traveling throughout the Bay area making connections with Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), local mass transit systems, and interconnecting trains going as far south as Los Angeles, and as far north as Sacramento and Oregon. Train passengers would be able to either walk from nearby residential units, bike along the multi-use path connection that is part of the proposed project, or park their motor vehicles in the parking lot that is part of the proposed project. Transit center patrons would also be able to access the site via public bus service that would be extended to the proposed Hercules ITC. The John Muir Parkway would be extended and two new bridges would be built over Refugio Creek to provide access to and circulation through the site. A temporary surface parking lot would be constructed immediately and a three-story park structure is included in the project as a future proposed action. In order to improve operation of the rail line, the UPRR track would be realigned to the east, away from San Pablo Bay, and a new railroad bridge would be constructed over Refugio Creek. The creek would also be realigned and the creek channel into San Pablo Bay would be dredged to improve flow during heavy rain events and high tides. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this draft EIS considers two action alternatives, one on the west side of Refugio Creek and the other on the east side. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The ITC would further the City of Hercules land use goals and improve access to public intercity rail and local buses for residents and workers. Providing access to public transit is also expected to reduce congestion on nearby Interstate 680, as well as local arterials. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities would create emissions of fugitive dust and criteria pollutants, impact northern coastal salt marsh and coastal brackish marsh habitats, result in the permanent fill of 2.65 acres of jurisdictional wetlands, and result in take of some wildlife species and in disturbance of sensitive bird and bat species. Dredging of Refugio Creek and San Pablo Bay could adversely impact water quality through mobilization of contaminated sediment. The alternative to build east of Refugio Creek would reduce the functionality of the adjacent properties and would require the threat of condemnation to acquire the site from a private party. The proposed project would move the Union Pacific tracks closer to sensitive receptors resulting in increased noise. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100369, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--531 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume 2)--652 pages, September 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bays KW - Creeks KW - Dredging KW - Ferries KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - San Pablo Bay KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129287?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HERCULES+INTERMODAL+TRANSIT+CENTER%2C+CONTRA+COSTA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=HERCULES+INTERMODAL+TRANSIT+CENTER%2C+CONTRA+COSTA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 26/89/189/191 SOUTH OF JACKSON, TETON COUNTY, WYOMING. AN - 759301383; 14642 AB - PURPOSE: The improvement of a 7.2-mile stretch of US 26/89/189/191 south of Jackson in Teton County, Wyoming is proposed. The project would extend from between mile posts 148.6 at the north end and 141.4 at the south end. The Snake River parallels the right-of-way through much of the southern portion of the study corridor. This section of highway constitutes a critical link within the region for commuters from Pinedale, Bondurant, and Alpine to access jobs and consumer outlets in Jackson. The highway is also heavily used by commercial vehicles as well as winter and summer tourist travelers. Varying widths of roadway along the corridor currently result in bottlenecks, exacerbating congestion and increasing risk of accidents. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are considered in this final EIS. The five-lane rural build alternative would provide for four 12-foot through lanes with one continuous 12-foot left-turn lane; the roadway would be flanked by eight-foot shoulders. The combination alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for a three-lane rural cross-section from mile post 141.4 to mile post 142.0 and a four-lane undivided cross-section from mile post 142.0 to mile post 142.5. The longest segment of this alternative, from mile post 142.5 to mile post 148.6, would consist of a five-lane rural highway. Both alternatives would require the replacement of a bridge crossing the Snake River floodplain. Both alternatives would also include a design element for construction of a separate pedestrian and bicycle pathway. Two pathway operations are considered. Under the preferred first option, the pathway would parallel the highway on the west side. Under the second option, the pathway would follow the same alignment from the northern study corridor terminus to Henry's Road South of Game Creek, where it would continue along Henry's Road to the point at which the road intersects with the highway near Horse Creek, at which point it would again share the same alignment as that of the first option. The typical pathway for each of the options would be 10 feet wide, but the pathway could be narrowed to eight feet in certain locations to minimize impacts to sensitive natural resources. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Widening the highway and maintaining a similar roadway width throughout the corridor would enhance system continuity, increase safety, and improve travel times. Accommodations for bicyclists and pedestrians would be improved. Anticipated residential and commercial growth in the Jackson area would be supported. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Development of 15.8 to 17.3 acres of new rights-of-way would displace 1.9 acres of farmland and, under the five-lane rural alternative, would displace three acres of land within the Teton County Scenic Preserve Trust. Impervious surface would be increased from 31.4 acres to either 68.8 acres or 71.4 acres. Vegetation losses would include 59.3 to 63.2 acres of mountain big sagebrush, 41.7 acres of riparian forest, and 1.6 acres of Douglas fir. The Game Creek archaeological site would be impacted. Either alternative would impact 13 wetlands, displacing 0.94 acres permanently. Bridge piers could be placed within the 100-year floodplain and channel of the Snake River. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0090D, Volume 33, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100370, Final EIS--825 pages, Technical Reports--CD-ROM, September 9, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-FEIS-08-01 KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Scenic Areas KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Snake River KW - Wyoming KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/759301383?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+26%2F89%2F189%2F191+SOUTH+OF+JACKSON%2C+TETON+COUNTY%2C+WYOMING.&rft.title=US+26%2F89%2F189%2F191+SOUTH+OF+JACKSON%2C+TETON+COUNTY%2C+WYOMING.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Cheyenne, Wyoming; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HERCULES INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 759301382; 14641 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of an intermodal transit center (ITC), associated roadway improvements, and ancillary facilities at a site adjacent to San Pablo Bay in Contra Costa County, California is proposed. The area surrounding the proposed Hercules ITC site is being redeveloped with transit-oriented housing and business developments and construction of a ferry terminal is being considered. The Hercules ITC would include pedestrian access to the existing Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line and a newly constructed passenger platform. Train service would be available throughout most of the day with the Hercules ITC serving passengers traveling throughout the Bay area making connections with Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), local mass transit systems, and interconnecting trains going as far south as Los Angeles, and as far north as Sacramento and Oregon. Train passengers would be able to either walk from nearby residential units, bike along the multi-use path connection that is part of the proposed project, or park their motor vehicles in the parking lot that is part of the proposed project. Transit center patrons would also be able to access the site via public bus service that would be extended to the proposed Hercules ITC. The John Muir Parkway would be extended and two new bridges would be built over Refugio Creek to provide access to and circulation through the site. A temporary surface parking lot would be constructed immediately and a three-story park structure is included in the project as a future proposed action. In order to improve operation of the rail line, the UPRR track would be realigned to the east, away from San Pablo Bay, and a new railroad bridge would be constructed over Refugio Creek. The creek would also be realigned and the creek channel into San Pablo Bay would be dredged to improve flow during heavy rain events and high tides. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this draft EIS considers two action alternatives, one on the west side of Refugio Creek and the other on the east side. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The ITC would further the City of Hercules land use goals and improve access to public intercity rail and local buses for residents and workers. Providing access to public transit is also expected to reduce congestion on nearby Interstate 680, as well as local arterials. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities would create emissions of fugitive dust and criteria pollutants, impact northern coastal salt marsh and coastal brackish marsh habitats, result in the permanent fill of 2.65 acres of jurisdictional wetlands, and result in take of some wildlife species and in disturbance of sensitive bird and bat species. Dredging of Refugio Creek and San Pablo Bay could adversely impact water quality through mobilization of contaminated sediment. The alternative to build east of Refugio Creek would reduce the functionality of the adjacent properties and would require the threat of condemnation to acquire the site from a private party. The proposed project would move the Union Pacific tracks closer to sensitive receptors resulting in increased noise. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100369, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--531 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume 2)--652 pages, September 9, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bays KW - Creeks KW - Dredging KW - Ferries KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - San Pablo Bay KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/759301382?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HERCULES+INTERMODAL+TRANSIT+CENTER%2C+CONTRA+COSTA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=HERCULES+INTERMODAL+TRANSIT+CENTER%2C+CONTRA+COSTA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO (REVISED DRAFT PROGRAMMATIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 3 of 3] T2 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO (REVISED DRAFT PROGRAMMATIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 876248326; 14633-1_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of transportation improvements in the I-70 Mountain Corridor, from mile post 116 to mile post 260, between Glenwood Springs and C-470, Garfield, Eagle, Summit, Clear Creek and Jefferson counties, Colorado is proposed. Population and employment growth in the Corridor and in the Denver metropolitan area has noticeably increased traffic volumes on I-70 for more than 15 years. Recreational travelers currently experience substantial traffic delays on weekends and holidays on the eastern side of the corridor and the western side experiences work trip delays during the week. This project began in 2000 and this revised programmatic draft EIS replaces the draft programmatic EIS issued in 2004. A screening process led to the development of more than 200 alternative elements in seven categories: transportation management, localized highway improvements, fixed guideway transit, rubber tire transit, highway, alternate routes, and aviation. The alternative elements advanced combined to form the components of 21 action alternatives which are evaluated along with the No Action Alternative. The preferred alternative consists of near-term and general long-term improvements for the Corridor to meet the travel demand for 2050 and address immediate needs. To address future uncertainties, trigger points and stakeholder involvement would be used to reassess needs and to determine the most appropriate transportation improvements to meet future demand. The preferred alternative would implement a multi-modal solution and include non-infrastructure related components, an advanced guideway system, and highway improvements. A specific advanced guideway system technology would be determined in subsequent study or a Tier 2 process and would be deployed to provide transit service from the Eagle County Regional Airport to C-470, a distance of 118 miles. It would be a fully elevated transit system on two tracks aligned to the north, south, or in the median of I-70. The system would connect to the regional transportation district network in Jefferson County and local and regional transit services at most of the 15 proposed transit stations along the route. The advanced guideway system would require new tunnel bores at both the Eisenhower-Johnson Memorial Tunnels and the Twin Tunnels. The six-lane highway widening improvements which would be made under the preferred alternative maximum program include both 55 mile per hour (mph) and 65 mph design options. The 55 mph option would use the existing I-70 alignment. The 65 mph design would require additional tunnels at Dowd Canyon, Hidden Valley, and Floyd Hill. At Dowd Canyon, two tunnels would be required for eastbound and westbound traffic. The preferred alternative identifies a minimum and maximum range of multi-modal improvements ranging in cost from $16.1 billion to $20.2 billion estimated in year of expenditure dollars and assuming the mid year of construction for the whole alternative is 2025. The 21 action alternatives evaluated in this document range in cost from $1.95 billion to $20.16 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would increase capacity, improve accessibility and mobility, and decrease congestion for travel demand, projected to occur in 2035 and 2050, to destinations along the I-70 Mountain Corridor as well as for interstate travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Transportation within the corridor, particularly automobile and truck traffic, would degrade air quality, displace key wildlife habitat, and impede and endanger wildlife movements. All action alternatives would have an impact on water quality, largely from contamination from vehicles which then is washed into nearby streams. Under the preferred alternative, the increase in runoff would range from 16 percent to 24 percent. Habitat for aquatic species and important streams would be disturbed. Historic resources identified in the I-70 Mountain Corridor include the Georgetown-Silver Plume National Historic Landmark District; and as many as 75 historic properties could be directly affected. All alternatives, including the No Action Alternative, would affect geologic hazards and need careful examination during Tier 2 processes to locate and design improvements to minimize the effects. The preferred alternative would affect between 65 and 90 recreation sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 05-0396D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100361, Revised Draft EIS and Appendices--648 pages and maps on CD-ROM, Technical Reports--6 volumes on CD-ROM, September 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Biologic Surveys KW - Cost Assessments KW - Energy Consumption KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Water Quality KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876248326?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-09-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO+%28REVISED+DRAFT+PROGRAMMATIC+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO+%28REVISED+DRAFT+PROGRAMMATIC+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO (REVISED DRAFT PROGRAMMATIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 2 of 3] T2 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO (REVISED DRAFT PROGRAMMATIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 876245782; 14633-1_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of transportation improvements in the I-70 Mountain Corridor, from mile post 116 to mile post 260, between Glenwood Springs and C-470, Garfield, Eagle, Summit, Clear Creek and Jefferson counties, Colorado is proposed. Population and employment growth in the Corridor and in the Denver metropolitan area has noticeably increased traffic volumes on I-70 for more than 15 years. Recreational travelers currently experience substantial traffic delays on weekends and holidays on the eastern side of the corridor and the western side experiences work trip delays during the week. This project began in 2000 and this revised programmatic draft EIS replaces the draft programmatic EIS issued in 2004. A screening process led to the development of more than 200 alternative elements in seven categories: transportation management, localized highway improvements, fixed guideway transit, rubber tire transit, highway, alternate routes, and aviation. The alternative elements advanced combined to form the components of 21 action alternatives which are evaluated along with the No Action Alternative. The preferred alternative consists of near-term and general long-term improvements for the Corridor to meet the travel demand for 2050 and address immediate needs. To address future uncertainties, trigger points and stakeholder involvement would be used to reassess needs and to determine the most appropriate transportation improvements to meet future demand. The preferred alternative would implement a multi-modal solution and include non-infrastructure related components, an advanced guideway system, and highway improvements. A specific advanced guideway system technology would be determined in subsequent study or a Tier 2 process and would be deployed to provide transit service from the Eagle County Regional Airport to C-470, a distance of 118 miles. It would be a fully elevated transit system on two tracks aligned to the north, south, or in the median of I-70. The system would connect to the regional transportation district network in Jefferson County and local and regional transit services at most of the 15 proposed transit stations along the route. The advanced guideway system would require new tunnel bores at both the Eisenhower-Johnson Memorial Tunnels and the Twin Tunnels. The six-lane highway widening improvements which would be made under the preferred alternative maximum program include both 55 mile per hour (mph) and 65 mph design options. The 55 mph option would use the existing I-70 alignment. The 65 mph design would require additional tunnels at Dowd Canyon, Hidden Valley, and Floyd Hill. At Dowd Canyon, two tunnels would be required for eastbound and westbound traffic. The preferred alternative identifies a minimum and maximum range of multi-modal improvements ranging in cost from $16.1 billion to $20.2 billion estimated in year of expenditure dollars and assuming the mid year of construction for the whole alternative is 2025. The 21 action alternatives evaluated in this document range in cost from $1.95 billion to $20.16 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would increase capacity, improve accessibility and mobility, and decrease congestion for travel demand, projected to occur in 2035 and 2050, to destinations along the I-70 Mountain Corridor as well as for interstate travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Transportation within the corridor, particularly automobile and truck traffic, would degrade air quality, displace key wildlife habitat, and impede and endanger wildlife movements. All action alternatives would have an impact on water quality, largely from contamination from vehicles which then is washed into nearby streams. Under the preferred alternative, the increase in runoff would range from 16 percent to 24 percent. Habitat for aquatic species and important streams would be disturbed. Historic resources identified in the I-70 Mountain Corridor include the Georgetown-Silver Plume National Historic Landmark District; and as many as 75 historic properties could be directly affected. All alternatives, including the No Action Alternative, would affect geologic hazards and need careful examination during Tier 2 processes to locate and design improvements to minimize the effects. The preferred alternative would affect between 65 and 90 recreation sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 05-0396D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100361, Revised Draft EIS and Appendices--648 pages and maps on CD-ROM, Technical Reports--6 volumes on CD-ROM, September 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Biologic Surveys KW - Cost Assessments KW - Energy Consumption KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Water Quality KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876245782?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-09-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO+%28REVISED+DRAFT+PROGRAMMATIC+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO+%28REVISED+DRAFT+PROGRAMMATIC+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO (REVISED DRAFT PROGRAMMATIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 1 of 3] T2 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO (REVISED DRAFT PROGRAMMATIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 876245770; 14633-1_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of transportation improvements in the I-70 Mountain Corridor, from mile post 116 to mile post 260, between Glenwood Springs and C-470, Garfield, Eagle, Summit, Clear Creek and Jefferson counties, Colorado is proposed. Population and employment growth in the Corridor and in the Denver metropolitan area has noticeably increased traffic volumes on I-70 for more than 15 years. Recreational travelers currently experience substantial traffic delays on weekends and holidays on the eastern side of the corridor and the western side experiences work trip delays during the week. This project began in 2000 and this revised programmatic draft EIS replaces the draft programmatic EIS issued in 2004. A screening process led to the development of more than 200 alternative elements in seven categories: transportation management, localized highway improvements, fixed guideway transit, rubber tire transit, highway, alternate routes, and aviation. The alternative elements advanced combined to form the components of 21 action alternatives which are evaluated along with the No Action Alternative. The preferred alternative consists of near-term and general long-term improvements for the Corridor to meet the travel demand for 2050 and address immediate needs. To address future uncertainties, trigger points and stakeholder involvement would be used to reassess needs and to determine the most appropriate transportation improvements to meet future demand. The preferred alternative would implement a multi-modal solution and include non-infrastructure related components, an advanced guideway system, and highway improvements. A specific advanced guideway system technology would be determined in subsequent study or a Tier 2 process and would be deployed to provide transit service from the Eagle County Regional Airport to C-470, a distance of 118 miles. It would be a fully elevated transit system on two tracks aligned to the north, south, or in the median of I-70. The system would connect to the regional transportation district network in Jefferson County and local and regional transit services at most of the 15 proposed transit stations along the route. The advanced guideway system would require new tunnel bores at both the Eisenhower-Johnson Memorial Tunnels and the Twin Tunnels. The six-lane highway widening improvements which would be made under the preferred alternative maximum program include both 55 mile per hour (mph) and 65 mph design options. The 55 mph option would use the existing I-70 alignment. The 65 mph design would require additional tunnels at Dowd Canyon, Hidden Valley, and Floyd Hill. At Dowd Canyon, two tunnels would be required for eastbound and westbound traffic. The preferred alternative identifies a minimum and maximum range of multi-modal improvements ranging in cost from $16.1 billion to $20.2 billion estimated in year of expenditure dollars and assuming the mid year of construction for the whole alternative is 2025. The 21 action alternatives evaluated in this document range in cost from $1.95 billion to $20.16 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would increase capacity, improve accessibility and mobility, and decrease congestion for travel demand, projected to occur in 2035 and 2050, to destinations along the I-70 Mountain Corridor as well as for interstate travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Transportation within the corridor, particularly automobile and truck traffic, would degrade air quality, displace key wildlife habitat, and impede and endanger wildlife movements. All action alternatives would have an impact on water quality, largely from contamination from vehicles which then is washed into nearby streams. Under the preferred alternative, the increase in runoff would range from 16 percent to 24 percent. Habitat for aquatic species and important streams would be disturbed. Historic resources identified in the I-70 Mountain Corridor include the Georgetown-Silver Plume National Historic Landmark District; and as many as 75 historic properties could be directly affected. All alternatives, including the No Action Alternative, would affect geologic hazards and need careful examination during Tier 2 processes to locate and design improvements to minimize the effects. The preferred alternative would affect between 65 and 90 recreation sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 05-0396D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100361, Revised Draft EIS and Appendices--648 pages and maps on CD-ROM, Technical Reports--6 volumes on CD-ROM, September 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Biologic Surveys KW - Cost Assessments KW - Energy Consumption KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Water Quality KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876245770?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-09-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO+%28REVISED+DRAFT+PROGRAMMATIC+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO+%28REVISED+DRAFT+PROGRAMMATIC+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR, GARFIELD, EAGLE, SUMMIT, CLEAR CREEK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, COLORADO (REVISED DRAFT PROGRAMMATIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 759301375; 14633 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of transportation improvements in the I-70 Mountain Corridor, from mile post 116 to mile post 260, between Glenwood Springs and C-470, Garfield, Eagle, Summit, Clear Creek and Jefferson counties, Colorado is proposed. Population and employment growth in the Corridor and in the Denver metropolitan area has noticeably increased traffic volumes on I-70 for more than 15 years. Recreational travelers currently experience substantial traffic delays on weekends and holidays on the eastern side of the corridor and the western side experiences work trip delays during the week. This project began in 2000 and this revised programmatic draft EIS replaces the draft programmatic EIS issued in 2004. A screening process led to the development of more than 200 alternative elements in seven categories: transportation management, localized highway improvements, fixed guideway transit, rubber tire transit, highway, alternate routes, and aviation. The alternative elements advanced combined to form the components of 21 action alternatives which are evaluated along with the No Action Alternative. The preferred alternative consists of near-term and general long-term improvements for the Corridor to meet the travel demand for 2050 and address immediate needs. To address future uncertainties, trigger points and stakeholder involvement would be used to reassess needs and to determine the most appropriate transportation improvements to meet future demand. The preferred alternative would implement a multi-modal solution and include non-infrastructure related components, an advanced guideway system, and highway improvements. A specific advanced guideway system technology would be determined in subsequent study or a Tier 2 process and would be deployed to provide transit service from the Eagle County Regional Airport to C-470, a distance of 118 miles. It would be a fully elevated transit system on two tracks aligned to the north, south, or in the median of I-70. The system would connect to the regional transportation district network in Jefferson County and local and regional transit services at most of the 15 proposed transit stations along the route. The advanced guideway system would require new tunnel bores at both the Eisenhower-Johnson Memorial Tunnels and the Twin Tunnels. The six-lane highway widening improvements which would be made under the preferred alternative maximum program include both 55 mile per hour (mph) and 65 mph design options. The 55 mph option would use the existing I-70 alignment. The 65 mph design would require additional tunnels at Dowd Canyon, Hidden Valley, and Floyd Hill. At Dowd Canyon, two tunnels would be required for eastbound and westbound traffic. The preferred alternative identifies a minimum and maximum range of multi-modal improvements ranging in cost from $16.1 billion to $20.2 billion estimated in year of expenditure dollars and assuming the mid year of construction for the whole alternative is 2025. The 21 action alternatives evaluated in this document range in cost from $1.95 billion to $20.16 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would increase capacity, improve accessibility and mobility, and decrease congestion for travel demand, projected to occur in 2035 and 2050, to destinations along the I-70 Mountain Corridor as well as for interstate travel. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Transportation within the corridor, particularly automobile and truck traffic, would degrade air quality, displace key wildlife habitat, and impede and endanger wildlife movements. All action alternatives would have an impact on water quality, largely from contamination from vehicles which then is washed into nearby streams. Under the preferred alternative, the increase in runoff would range from 16 percent to 24 percent. Habitat for aquatic species and important streams would be disturbed. Historic resources identified in the I-70 Mountain Corridor include the Georgetown-Silver Plume National Historic Landmark District; and as many as 75 historic properties could be directly affected. All alternatives, including the No Action Alternative, would affect geologic hazards and need careful examination during Tier 2 processes to locate and design improvements to minimize the effects. The preferred alternative would affect between 65 and 90 recreation sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the original draft EIS, see 05-0396D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100361, Revised Draft EIS and Appendices--648 pages and maps on CD-ROM, Technical Reports--6 volumes on CD-ROM, September 2, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Biologic Surveys KW - Cost Assessments KW - Energy Consumption KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Water Quality KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/759301375?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-09-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO+%28REVISED+DRAFT+PROGRAMMATIC+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=I-70+MOUNTAIN+CORRIDOR%2C+GARFIELD%2C+EAGLE%2C+SUMMIT%2C+CLEAR+CREEK+AND+JEFFERSON+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO+%28REVISED+DRAFT+PROGRAMMATIC+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Evaluation of the Conversion from Two-Way Stop Sign Control to All-Way Stop Sign Control at 53 Locations in North Carolina AN - 864400756; 14322811 AB - Abstract not available. JF - Journal of Transportation Safety and Security AU - Simpson, Carrie L AU - Hummer, Joseph E AD - Transportation Mobility and Safety Division, North Carolina Department of Transportation, Raleigh, North Carolina, USA Y1 - 2010/09// PY - 2010 DA - Sep 2010 SP - 239 EP - 260 PB - Taylor & Francis Group Ltd., 2 Park Square Oxford OX14 4RN UK VL - 2 IS - 3 SN - 1943-9962, 1943-9962 KW - Health & Safety Science Abstracts KW - USA, North Carolina KW - Transportation KW - security KW - H 2000:Transportation UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/864400756?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ahealthsafetyabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Journal+of+Transportation+Safety+and+Security&rft.atitle=Evaluation+of+the+Conversion+from+Two-Way+Stop+Sign+Control+to+All-Way+Stop+Sign+Control+at+53+Locations+in+North+Carolina&rft.au=Simpson%2C+Carrie+L%3BHummer%2C+Joseph+E&rft.aulast=Simpson&rft.aufirst=Carrie&rft.date=2010-09-01&rft.volume=2&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=239&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Journal+of+Transportation+Safety+and+Security&rft.issn=19439962&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080%2F19439962.2010.506355 L2 - http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~db=all~content=a926883669~frm=titlelink LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-03-01 N1 - Last updated - 2015-03-19 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Transportation; security; USA, North Carolina DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19439962.2010.506355 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 24 of 35] T2 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133557; 14625-3_0024 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Metro Purple Line and Metro Red Line heavy rail subway from its current westernmost termini toward west Los Angeles and Santa Monica, Los Angeles County, California is proposed. The Westside Subway Extension Transit Corridor Project results from nearly 30 years of planning and environmental review. The study area encompasses 38 square miles in western Los Angeles County and includes portions of five jurisdictions: the Cities of Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Currently, large population and employment centers are scattered throughout 15 existing major activity centers in the corridor. These activity centers are served by extremely congested road networks that will deteriorate further with the projected increase in population of 51,000 and the 58,000 additional jobs in the corridor by 2035. The current high level of transit usage is projected to increase by 29 percent between 2006 and 2035. The Westside project would extend the Metro Purple Line/Metro Red Line from its current western termini at Wilshire/Western Station and Hollywood/Highland Station to a new western terminus either in Westwood near the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), the West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital, or the City of Santa Monica. Alternatives considered in this draft EIS include a No Build Alternative, a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Alternative, five build alternatives with six options, and two minimum operable segments (MOS). The TSM Alternative would include more frequent bus service. The build alternatives would overlay heavy rail transit (HRT) on the rail and bus networks. Trains would operate in an exclusive grade-separated right-of-way, picking up electrical power from a third rail adjacent to and parallel with the running rail. The separated right-of-way would be all in a tunnel, with the top of the tunnel being a minimum 30 to 70 feet below the ground. No crossings of the right-of-way would be permitted in the same plane with HRT operations. HRT stations would be accessed from street-level entrances by stairs, escalators, and elevators that would bring patrons to a mezzanine level where ticketing functions would be located. In addition to the alternative termini for the proposed extension, alignment and station location options are considered and two MOS options are evaluated in the event of a decision to build the project in phases. Estimated capital costs of the build alternatives in 2009 dollars range from $4.04 billion to $8.75 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: HRT technology would allow very high passenger-carrying capacity of up to 1,000 passengers per train and maximum speed of 70 miles per hour. Implementation would reduce traffic congestion on roads, improve transit travel time, and provide more reliable transit service to the 286,246 transit riders who travel through the corridor today. Access to major activity and employment centers and transportation equity would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction impacts would include traffic and access disruptions near station sites, temporary sidewalk and bicycle lane closures, construction noise and emissions of nitrogen oxide and particulate matter, temporary removal of parking, visual effects, and haul trucks removing material excavated from the tunnel and station boxes. Each of the five build alternatives would displace one or more properties and could result in adverse effect on historic properties at the proposed Wilshire/Rodeo Station. Some business displacement would occur. The total number of jobs displaced would depend on which portal location is selected at each station. Multiple sections of the build alternatives would traverse the Santa Monica Fault and would be susceptible to possible surface fault rupture hazard. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100353, pages Draft EIS (Volume 1)--842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 SP - ages Draft EIS (Volume 1) EP - -842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27 VL - 24 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133557?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=ages+Draft+EIS+%28Volume+1%29&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 23 of 35] T2 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133553; 14625-3_0023 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Metro Purple Line and Metro Red Line heavy rail subway from its current westernmost termini toward west Los Angeles and Santa Monica, Los Angeles County, California is proposed. The Westside Subway Extension Transit Corridor Project results from nearly 30 years of planning and environmental review. The study area encompasses 38 square miles in western Los Angeles County and includes portions of five jurisdictions: the Cities of Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Currently, large population and employment centers are scattered throughout 15 existing major activity centers in the corridor. These activity centers are served by extremely congested road networks that will deteriorate further with the projected increase in population of 51,000 and the 58,000 additional jobs in the corridor by 2035. The current high level of transit usage is projected to increase by 29 percent between 2006 and 2035. The Westside project would extend the Metro Purple Line/Metro Red Line from its current western termini at Wilshire/Western Station and Hollywood/Highland Station to a new western terminus either in Westwood near the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), the West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital, or the City of Santa Monica. Alternatives considered in this draft EIS include a No Build Alternative, a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Alternative, five build alternatives with six options, and two minimum operable segments (MOS). The TSM Alternative would include more frequent bus service. The build alternatives would overlay heavy rail transit (HRT) on the rail and bus networks. Trains would operate in an exclusive grade-separated right-of-way, picking up electrical power from a third rail adjacent to and parallel with the running rail. The separated right-of-way would be all in a tunnel, with the top of the tunnel being a minimum 30 to 70 feet below the ground. No crossings of the right-of-way would be permitted in the same plane with HRT operations. HRT stations would be accessed from street-level entrances by stairs, escalators, and elevators that would bring patrons to a mezzanine level where ticketing functions would be located. In addition to the alternative termini for the proposed extension, alignment and station location options are considered and two MOS options are evaluated in the event of a decision to build the project in phases. Estimated capital costs of the build alternatives in 2009 dollars range from $4.04 billion to $8.75 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: HRT technology would allow very high passenger-carrying capacity of up to 1,000 passengers per train and maximum speed of 70 miles per hour. Implementation would reduce traffic congestion on roads, improve transit travel time, and provide more reliable transit service to the 286,246 transit riders who travel through the corridor today. Access to major activity and employment centers and transportation equity would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction impacts would include traffic and access disruptions near station sites, temporary sidewalk and bicycle lane closures, construction noise and emissions of nitrogen oxide and particulate matter, temporary removal of parking, visual effects, and haul trucks removing material excavated from the tunnel and station boxes. Each of the five build alternatives would displace one or more properties and could result in adverse effect on historic properties at the proposed Wilshire/Rodeo Station. Some business displacement would occur. The total number of jobs displaced would depend on which portal location is selected at each station. Multiple sections of the build alternatives would traverse the Santa Monica Fault and would be susceptible to possible surface fault rupture hazard. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100353, pages Draft EIS (Volume 1)--842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 SP - ages Draft EIS (Volume 1) EP - -842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27 VL - 23 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133553?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=ages+Draft+EIS+%28Volume+1%29&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 22 of 35] T2 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133548; 14625-3_0022 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Metro Purple Line and Metro Red Line heavy rail subway from its current westernmost termini toward west Los Angeles and Santa Monica, Los Angeles County, California is proposed. The Westside Subway Extension Transit Corridor Project results from nearly 30 years of planning and environmental review. The study area encompasses 38 square miles in western Los Angeles County and includes portions of five jurisdictions: the Cities of Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Currently, large population and employment centers are scattered throughout 15 existing major activity centers in the corridor. These activity centers are served by extremely congested road networks that will deteriorate further with the projected increase in population of 51,000 and the 58,000 additional jobs in the corridor by 2035. The current high level of transit usage is projected to increase by 29 percent between 2006 and 2035. The Westside project would extend the Metro Purple Line/Metro Red Line from its current western termini at Wilshire/Western Station and Hollywood/Highland Station to a new western terminus either in Westwood near the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), the West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital, or the City of Santa Monica. Alternatives considered in this draft EIS include a No Build Alternative, a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Alternative, five build alternatives with six options, and two minimum operable segments (MOS). The TSM Alternative would include more frequent bus service. The build alternatives would overlay heavy rail transit (HRT) on the rail and bus networks. Trains would operate in an exclusive grade-separated right-of-way, picking up electrical power from a third rail adjacent to and parallel with the running rail. The separated right-of-way would be all in a tunnel, with the top of the tunnel being a minimum 30 to 70 feet below the ground. No crossings of the right-of-way would be permitted in the same plane with HRT operations. HRT stations would be accessed from street-level entrances by stairs, escalators, and elevators that would bring patrons to a mezzanine level where ticketing functions would be located. In addition to the alternative termini for the proposed extension, alignment and station location options are considered and two MOS options are evaluated in the event of a decision to build the project in phases. Estimated capital costs of the build alternatives in 2009 dollars range from $4.04 billion to $8.75 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: HRT technology would allow very high passenger-carrying capacity of up to 1,000 passengers per train and maximum speed of 70 miles per hour. Implementation would reduce traffic congestion on roads, improve transit travel time, and provide more reliable transit service to the 286,246 transit riders who travel through the corridor today. Access to major activity and employment centers and transportation equity would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction impacts would include traffic and access disruptions near station sites, temporary sidewalk and bicycle lane closures, construction noise and emissions of nitrogen oxide and particulate matter, temporary removal of parking, visual effects, and haul trucks removing material excavated from the tunnel and station boxes. Each of the five build alternatives would displace one or more properties and could result in adverse effect on historic properties at the proposed Wilshire/Rodeo Station. Some business displacement would occur. The total number of jobs displaced would depend on which portal location is selected at each station. Multiple sections of the build alternatives would traverse the Santa Monica Fault and would be susceptible to possible surface fault rupture hazard. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100353, pages Draft EIS (Volume 1)--842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 SP - ages Draft EIS (Volume 1) EP - -842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27 VL - 22 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133548?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=ages+Draft+EIS+%28Volume+1%29&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 21 of 35] T2 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133545; 14625-3_0021 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Metro Purple Line and Metro Red Line heavy rail subway from its current westernmost termini toward west Los Angeles and Santa Monica, Los Angeles County, California is proposed. The Westside Subway Extension Transit Corridor Project results from nearly 30 years of planning and environmental review. The study area encompasses 38 square miles in western Los Angeles County and includes portions of five jurisdictions: the Cities of Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Currently, large population and employment centers are scattered throughout 15 existing major activity centers in the corridor. These activity centers are served by extremely congested road networks that will deteriorate further with the projected increase in population of 51,000 and the 58,000 additional jobs in the corridor by 2035. The current high level of transit usage is projected to increase by 29 percent between 2006 and 2035. The Westside project would extend the Metro Purple Line/Metro Red Line from its current western termini at Wilshire/Western Station and Hollywood/Highland Station to a new western terminus either in Westwood near the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), the West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital, or the City of Santa Monica. Alternatives considered in this draft EIS include a No Build Alternative, a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Alternative, five build alternatives with six options, and two minimum operable segments (MOS). The TSM Alternative would include more frequent bus service. The build alternatives would overlay heavy rail transit (HRT) on the rail and bus networks. Trains would operate in an exclusive grade-separated right-of-way, picking up electrical power from a third rail adjacent to and parallel with the running rail. The separated right-of-way would be all in a tunnel, with the top of the tunnel being a minimum 30 to 70 feet below the ground. No crossings of the right-of-way would be permitted in the same plane with HRT operations. HRT stations would be accessed from street-level entrances by stairs, escalators, and elevators that would bring patrons to a mezzanine level where ticketing functions would be located. In addition to the alternative termini for the proposed extension, alignment and station location options are considered and two MOS options are evaluated in the event of a decision to build the project in phases. Estimated capital costs of the build alternatives in 2009 dollars range from $4.04 billion to $8.75 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: HRT technology would allow very high passenger-carrying capacity of up to 1,000 passengers per train and maximum speed of 70 miles per hour. Implementation would reduce traffic congestion on roads, improve transit travel time, and provide more reliable transit service to the 286,246 transit riders who travel through the corridor today. Access to major activity and employment centers and transportation equity would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction impacts would include traffic and access disruptions near station sites, temporary sidewalk and bicycle lane closures, construction noise and emissions of nitrogen oxide and particulate matter, temporary removal of parking, visual effects, and haul trucks removing material excavated from the tunnel and station boxes. Each of the five build alternatives would displace one or more properties and could result in adverse effect on historic properties at the proposed Wilshire/Rodeo Station. Some business displacement would occur. The total number of jobs displaced would depend on which portal location is selected at each station. Multiple sections of the build alternatives would traverse the Santa Monica Fault and would be susceptible to possible surface fault rupture hazard. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100353, pages Draft EIS (Volume 1)--842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 SP - ages Draft EIS (Volume 1) EP - -842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27 VL - 21 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133545?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=ages+Draft+EIS+%28Volume+1%29&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 20 of 35] T2 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133543; 14625-3_0020 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Metro Purple Line and Metro Red Line heavy rail subway from its current westernmost termini toward west Los Angeles and Santa Monica, Los Angeles County, California is proposed. The Westside Subway Extension Transit Corridor Project results from nearly 30 years of planning and environmental review. The study area encompasses 38 square miles in western Los Angeles County and includes portions of five jurisdictions: the Cities of Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Currently, large population and employment centers are scattered throughout 15 existing major activity centers in the corridor. These activity centers are served by extremely congested road networks that will deteriorate further with the projected increase in population of 51,000 and the 58,000 additional jobs in the corridor by 2035. The current high level of transit usage is projected to increase by 29 percent between 2006 and 2035. The Westside project would extend the Metro Purple Line/Metro Red Line from its current western termini at Wilshire/Western Station and Hollywood/Highland Station to a new western terminus either in Westwood near the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), the West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital, or the City of Santa Monica. Alternatives considered in this draft EIS include a No Build Alternative, a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Alternative, five build alternatives with six options, and two minimum operable segments (MOS). The TSM Alternative would include more frequent bus service. The build alternatives would overlay heavy rail transit (HRT) on the rail and bus networks. Trains would operate in an exclusive grade-separated right-of-way, picking up electrical power from a third rail adjacent to and parallel with the running rail. The separated right-of-way would be all in a tunnel, with the top of the tunnel being a minimum 30 to 70 feet below the ground. No crossings of the right-of-way would be permitted in the same plane with HRT operations. HRT stations would be accessed from street-level entrances by stairs, escalators, and elevators that would bring patrons to a mezzanine level where ticketing functions would be located. In addition to the alternative termini for the proposed extension, alignment and station location options are considered and two MOS options are evaluated in the event of a decision to build the project in phases. Estimated capital costs of the build alternatives in 2009 dollars range from $4.04 billion to $8.75 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: HRT technology would allow very high passenger-carrying capacity of up to 1,000 passengers per train and maximum speed of 70 miles per hour. Implementation would reduce traffic congestion on roads, improve transit travel time, and provide more reliable transit service to the 286,246 transit riders who travel through the corridor today. Access to major activity and employment centers and transportation equity would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction impacts would include traffic and access disruptions near station sites, temporary sidewalk and bicycle lane closures, construction noise and emissions of nitrogen oxide and particulate matter, temporary removal of parking, visual effects, and haul trucks removing material excavated from the tunnel and station boxes. Each of the five build alternatives would displace one or more properties and could result in adverse effect on historic properties at the proposed Wilshire/Rodeo Station. Some business displacement would occur. The total number of jobs displaced would depend on which portal location is selected at each station. Multiple sections of the build alternatives would traverse the Santa Monica Fault and would be susceptible to possible surface fault rupture hazard. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100353, pages Draft EIS (Volume 1)--842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 SP - ages Draft EIS (Volume 1) EP - -842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27 VL - 20 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133543?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=ages+Draft+EIS+%28Volume+1%29&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 19 of 35] T2 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133540; 14625-3_0019 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Metro Purple Line and Metro Red Line heavy rail subway from its current westernmost termini toward west Los Angeles and Santa Monica, Los Angeles County, California is proposed. The Westside Subway Extension Transit Corridor Project results from nearly 30 years of planning and environmental review. The study area encompasses 38 square miles in western Los Angeles County and includes portions of five jurisdictions: the Cities of Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Currently, large population and employment centers are scattered throughout 15 existing major activity centers in the corridor. These activity centers are served by extremely congested road networks that will deteriorate further with the projected increase in population of 51,000 and the 58,000 additional jobs in the corridor by 2035. The current high level of transit usage is projected to increase by 29 percent between 2006 and 2035. The Westside project would extend the Metro Purple Line/Metro Red Line from its current western termini at Wilshire/Western Station and Hollywood/Highland Station to a new western terminus either in Westwood near the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), the West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital, or the City of Santa Monica. Alternatives considered in this draft EIS include a No Build Alternative, a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Alternative, five build alternatives with six options, and two minimum operable segments (MOS). The TSM Alternative would include more frequent bus service. The build alternatives would overlay heavy rail transit (HRT) on the rail and bus networks. Trains would operate in an exclusive grade-separated right-of-way, picking up electrical power from a third rail adjacent to and parallel with the running rail. The separated right-of-way would be all in a tunnel, with the top of the tunnel being a minimum 30 to 70 feet below the ground. No crossings of the right-of-way would be permitted in the same plane with HRT operations. HRT stations would be accessed from street-level entrances by stairs, escalators, and elevators that would bring patrons to a mezzanine level where ticketing functions would be located. In addition to the alternative termini for the proposed extension, alignment and station location options are considered and two MOS options are evaluated in the event of a decision to build the project in phases. Estimated capital costs of the build alternatives in 2009 dollars range from $4.04 billion to $8.75 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: HRT technology would allow very high passenger-carrying capacity of up to 1,000 passengers per train and maximum speed of 70 miles per hour. Implementation would reduce traffic congestion on roads, improve transit travel time, and provide more reliable transit service to the 286,246 transit riders who travel through the corridor today. Access to major activity and employment centers and transportation equity would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction impacts would include traffic and access disruptions near station sites, temporary sidewalk and bicycle lane closures, construction noise and emissions of nitrogen oxide and particulate matter, temporary removal of parking, visual effects, and haul trucks removing material excavated from the tunnel and station boxes. Each of the five build alternatives would displace one or more properties and could result in adverse effect on historic properties at the proposed Wilshire/Rodeo Station. Some business displacement would occur. The total number of jobs displaced would depend on which portal location is selected at each station. Multiple sections of the build alternatives would traverse the Santa Monica Fault and would be susceptible to possible surface fault rupture hazard. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100353, pages Draft EIS (Volume 1)--842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 SP - ages Draft EIS (Volume 1) EP - -842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27 VL - 19 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133540?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=ages+Draft+EIS+%28Volume+1%29&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 17 of 35] T2 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133538; 14625-3_0017 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Metro Purple Line and Metro Red Line heavy rail subway from its current westernmost termini toward west Los Angeles and Santa Monica, Los Angeles County, California is proposed. The Westside Subway Extension Transit Corridor Project results from nearly 30 years of planning and environmental review. The study area encompasses 38 square miles in western Los Angeles County and includes portions of five jurisdictions: the Cities of Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Currently, large population and employment centers are scattered throughout 15 existing major activity centers in the corridor. These activity centers are served by extremely congested road networks that will deteriorate further with the projected increase in population of 51,000 and the 58,000 additional jobs in the corridor by 2035. The current high level of transit usage is projected to increase by 29 percent between 2006 and 2035. The Westside project would extend the Metro Purple Line/Metro Red Line from its current western termini at Wilshire/Western Station and Hollywood/Highland Station to a new western terminus either in Westwood near the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), the West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital, or the City of Santa Monica. Alternatives considered in this draft EIS include a No Build Alternative, a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Alternative, five build alternatives with six options, and two minimum operable segments (MOS). The TSM Alternative would include more frequent bus service. The build alternatives would overlay heavy rail transit (HRT) on the rail and bus networks. Trains would operate in an exclusive grade-separated right-of-way, picking up electrical power from a third rail adjacent to and parallel with the running rail. The separated right-of-way would be all in a tunnel, with the top of the tunnel being a minimum 30 to 70 feet below the ground. No crossings of the right-of-way would be permitted in the same plane with HRT operations. HRT stations would be accessed from street-level entrances by stairs, escalators, and elevators that would bring patrons to a mezzanine level where ticketing functions would be located. In addition to the alternative termini for the proposed extension, alignment and station location options are considered and two MOS options are evaluated in the event of a decision to build the project in phases. Estimated capital costs of the build alternatives in 2009 dollars range from $4.04 billion to $8.75 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: HRT technology would allow very high passenger-carrying capacity of up to 1,000 passengers per train and maximum speed of 70 miles per hour. Implementation would reduce traffic congestion on roads, improve transit travel time, and provide more reliable transit service to the 286,246 transit riders who travel through the corridor today. Access to major activity and employment centers and transportation equity would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction impacts would include traffic and access disruptions near station sites, temporary sidewalk and bicycle lane closures, construction noise and emissions of nitrogen oxide and particulate matter, temporary removal of parking, visual effects, and haul trucks removing material excavated from the tunnel and station boxes. Each of the five build alternatives would displace one or more properties and could result in adverse effect on historic properties at the proposed Wilshire/Rodeo Station. Some business displacement would occur. The total number of jobs displaced would depend on which portal location is selected at each station. Multiple sections of the build alternatives would traverse the Santa Monica Fault and would be susceptible to possible surface fault rupture hazard. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100353, pages Draft EIS (Volume 1)--842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 SP - ages Draft EIS (Volume 1) EP - -842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27 VL - 17 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133538?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=ages+Draft+EIS+%28Volume+1%29&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 16 of 35] T2 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133535; 14625-3_0016 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Metro Purple Line and Metro Red Line heavy rail subway from its current westernmost termini toward west Los Angeles and Santa Monica, Los Angeles County, California is proposed. The Westside Subway Extension Transit Corridor Project results from nearly 30 years of planning and environmental review. The study area encompasses 38 square miles in western Los Angeles County and includes portions of five jurisdictions: the Cities of Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Currently, large population and employment centers are scattered throughout 15 existing major activity centers in the corridor. These activity centers are served by extremely congested road networks that will deteriorate further with the projected increase in population of 51,000 and the 58,000 additional jobs in the corridor by 2035. The current high level of transit usage is projected to increase by 29 percent between 2006 and 2035. The Westside project would extend the Metro Purple Line/Metro Red Line from its current western termini at Wilshire/Western Station and Hollywood/Highland Station to a new western terminus either in Westwood near the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), the West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital, or the City of Santa Monica. Alternatives considered in this draft EIS include a No Build Alternative, a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Alternative, five build alternatives with six options, and two minimum operable segments (MOS). The TSM Alternative would include more frequent bus service. The build alternatives would overlay heavy rail transit (HRT) on the rail and bus networks. Trains would operate in an exclusive grade-separated right-of-way, picking up electrical power from a third rail adjacent to and parallel with the running rail. The separated right-of-way would be all in a tunnel, with the top of the tunnel being a minimum 30 to 70 feet below the ground. No crossings of the right-of-way would be permitted in the same plane with HRT operations. HRT stations would be accessed from street-level entrances by stairs, escalators, and elevators that would bring patrons to a mezzanine level where ticketing functions would be located. In addition to the alternative termini for the proposed extension, alignment and station location options are considered and two MOS options are evaluated in the event of a decision to build the project in phases. Estimated capital costs of the build alternatives in 2009 dollars range from $4.04 billion to $8.75 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: HRT technology would allow very high passenger-carrying capacity of up to 1,000 passengers per train and maximum speed of 70 miles per hour. Implementation would reduce traffic congestion on roads, improve transit travel time, and provide more reliable transit service to the 286,246 transit riders who travel through the corridor today. Access to major activity and employment centers and transportation equity would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction impacts would include traffic and access disruptions near station sites, temporary sidewalk and bicycle lane closures, construction noise and emissions of nitrogen oxide and particulate matter, temporary removal of parking, visual effects, and haul trucks removing material excavated from the tunnel and station boxes. Each of the five build alternatives would displace one or more properties and could result in adverse effect on historic properties at the proposed Wilshire/Rodeo Station. Some business displacement would occur. The total number of jobs displaced would depend on which portal location is selected at each station. Multiple sections of the build alternatives would traverse the Santa Monica Fault and would be susceptible to possible surface fault rupture hazard. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100353, pages Draft EIS (Volume 1)--842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 SP - ages Draft EIS (Volume 1) EP - -842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27 VL - 16 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133535?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=ages+Draft+EIS+%28Volume+1%29&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 15 of 35] T2 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133533; 14625-3_0015 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Metro Purple Line and Metro Red Line heavy rail subway from its current westernmost termini toward west Los Angeles and Santa Monica, Los Angeles County, California is proposed. The Westside Subway Extension Transit Corridor Project results from nearly 30 years of planning and environmental review. The study area encompasses 38 square miles in western Los Angeles County and includes portions of five jurisdictions: the Cities of Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Currently, large population and employment centers are scattered throughout 15 existing major activity centers in the corridor. These activity centers are served by extremely congested road networks that will deteriorate further with the projected increase in population of 51,000 and the 58,000 additional jobs in the corridor by 2035. The current high level of transit usage is projected to increase by 29 percent between 2006 and 2035. The Westside project would extend the Metro Purple Line/Metro Red Line from its current western termini at Wilshire/Western Station and Hollywood/Highland Station to a new western terminus either in Westwood near the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), the West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital, or the City of Santa Monica. Alternatives considered in this draft EIS include a No Build Alternative, a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Alternative, five build alternatives with six options, and two minimum operable segments (MOS). The TSM Alternative would include more frequent bus service. The build alternatives would overlay heavy rail transit (HRT) on the rail and bus networks. Trains would operate in an exclusive grade-separated right-of-way, picking up electrical power from a third rail adjacent to and parallel with the running rail. The separated right-of-way would be all in a tunnel, with the top of the tunnel being a minimum 30 to 70 feet below the ground. No crossings of the right-of-way would be permitted in the same plane with HRT operations. HRT stations would be accessed from street-level entrances by stairs, escalators, and elevators that would bring patrons to a mezzanine level where ticketing functions would be located. In addition to the alternative termini for the proposed extension, alignment and station location options are considered and two MOS options are evaluated in the event of a decision to build the project in phases. Estimated capital costs of the build alternatives in 2009 dollars range from $4.04 billion to $8.75 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: HRT technology would allow very high passenger-carrying capacity of up to 1,000 passengers per train and maximum speed of 70 miles per hour. Implementation would reduce traffic congestion on roads, improve transit travel time, and provide more reliable transit service to the 286,246 transit riders who travel through the corridor today. Access to major activity and employment centers and transportation equity would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction impacts would include traffic and access disruptions near station sites, temporary sidewalk and bicycle lane closures, construction noise and emissions of nitrogen oxide and particulate matter, temporary removal of parking, visual effects, and haul trucks removing material excavated from the tunnel and station boxes. Each of the five build alternatives would displace one or more properties and could result in adverse effect on historic properties at the proposed Wilshire/Rodeo Station. Some business displacement would occur. The total number of jobs displaced would depend on which portal location is selected at each station. Multiple sections of the build alternatives would traverse the Santa Monica Fault and would be susceptible to possible surface fault rupture hazard. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100353, pages Draft EIS (Volume 1)--842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 SP - ages Draft EIS (Volume 1) EP - -842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133533?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=ages+Draft+EIS+%28Volume+1%29&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 14 of 35] T2 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133530; 14625-3_0014 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Metro Purple Line and Metro Red Line heavy rail subway from its current westernmost termini toward west Los Angeles and Santa Monica, Los Angeles County, California is proposed. The Westside Subway Extension Transit Corridor Project results from nearly 30 years of planning and environmental review. The study area encompasses 38 square miles in western Los Angeles County and includes portions of five jurisdictions: the Cities of Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Currently, large population and employment centers are scattered throughout 15 existing major activity centers in the corridor. These activity centers are served by extremely congested road networks that will deteriorate further with the projected increase in population of 51,000 and the 58,000 additional jobs in the corridor by 2035. The current high level of transit usage is projected to increase by 29 percent between 2006 and 2035. The Westside project would extend the Metro Purple Line/Metro Red Line from its current western termini at Wilshire/Western Station and Hollywood/Highland Station to a new western terminus either in Westwood near the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), the West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital, or the City of Santa Monica. Alternatives considered in this draft EIS include a No Build Alternative, a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Alternative, five build alternatives with six options, and two minimum operable segments (MOS). The TSM Alternative would include more frequent bus service. The build alternatives would overlay heavy rail transit (HRT) on the rail and bus networks. Trains would operate in an exclusive grade-separated right-of-way, picking up electrical power from a third rail adjacent to and parallel with the running rail. The separated right-of-way would be all in a tunnel, with the top of the tunnel being a minimum 30 to 70 feet below the ground. No crossings of the right-of-way would be permitted in the same plane with HRT operations. HRT stations would be accessed from street-level entrances by stairs, escalators, and elevators that would bring patrons to a mezzanine level where ticketing functions would be located. In addition to the alternative termini for the proposed extension, alignment and station location options are considered and two MOS options are evaluated in the event of a decision to build the project in phases. Estimated capital costs of the build alternatives in 2009 dollars range from $4.04 billion to $8.75 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: HRT technology would allow very high passenger-carrying capacity of up to 1,000 passengers per train and maximum speed of 70 miles per hour. Implementation would reduce traffic congestion on roads, improve transit travel time, and provide more reliable transit service to the 286,246 transit riders who travel through the corridor today. Access to major activity and employment centers and transportation equity would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction impacts would include traffic and access disruptions near station sites, temporary sidewalk and bicycle lane closures, construction noise and emissions of nitrogen oxide and particulate matter, temporary removal of parking, visual effects, and haul trucks removing material excavated from the tunnel and station boxes. Each of the five build alternatives would displace one or more properties and could result in adverse effect on historic properties at the proposed Wilshire/Rodeo Station. Some business displacement would occur. The total number of jobs displaced would depend on which portal location is selected at each station. Multiple sections of the build alternatives would traverse the Santa Monica Fault and would be susceptible to possible surface fault rupture hazard. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100353, pages Draft EIS (Volume 1)--842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 SP - ages Draft EIS (Volume 1) EP - -842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133530?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=ages+Draft+EIS+%28Volume+1%29&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 13 of 35] T2 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133525; 14625-3_0013 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Metro Purple Line and Metro Red Line heavy rail subway from its current westernmost termini toward west Los Angeles and Santa Monica, Los Angeles County, California is proposed. The Westside Subway Extension Transit Corridor Project results from nearly 30 years of planning and environmental review. The study area encompasses 38 square miles in western Los Angeles County and includes portions of five jurisdictions: the Cities of Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Currently, large population and employment centers are scattered throughout 15 existing major activity centers in the corridor. These activity centers are served by extremely congested road networks that will deteriorate further with the projected increase in population of 51,000 and the 58,000 additional jobs in the corridor by 2035. The current high level of transit usage is projected to increase by 29 percent between 2006 and 2035. The Westside project would extend the Metro Purple Line/Metro Red Line from its current western termini at Wilshire/Western Station and Hollywood/Highland Station to a new western terminus either in Westwood near the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), the West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital, or the City of Santa Monica. Alternatives considered in this draft EIS include a No Build Alternative, a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Alternative, five build alternatives with six options, and two minimum operable segments (MOS). The TSM Alternative would include more frequent bus service. The build alternatives would overlay heavy rail transit (HRT) on the rail and bus networks. Trains would operate in an exclusive grade-separated right-of-way, picking up electrical power from a third rail adjacent to and parallel with the running rail. The separated right-of-way would be all in a tunnel, with the top of the tunnel being a minimum 30 to 70 feet below the ground. No crossings of the right-of-way would be permitted in the same plane with HRT operations. HRT stations would be accessed from street-level entrances by stairs, escalators, and elevators that would bring patrons to a mezzanine level where ticketing functions would be located. In addition to the alternative termini for the proposed extension, alignment and station location options are considered and two MOS options are evaluated in the event of a decision to build the project in phases. Estimated capital costs of the build alternatives in 2009 dollars range from $4.04 billion to $8.75 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: HRT technology would allow very high passenger-carrying capacity of up to 1,000 passengers per train and maximum speed of 70 miles per hour. Implementation would reduce traffic congestion on roads, improve transit travel time, and provide more reliable transit service to the 286,246 transit riders who travel through the corridor today. Access to major activity and employment centers and transportation equity would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction impacts would include traffic and access disruptions near station sites, temporary sidewalk and bicycle lane closures, construction noise and emissions of nitrogen oxide and particulate matter, temporary removal of parking, visual effects, and haul trucks removing material excavated from the tunnel and station boxes. Each of the five build alternatives would displace one or more properties and could result in adverse effect on historic properties at the proposed Wilshire/Rodeo Station. Some business displacement would occur. The total number of jobs displaced would depend on which portal location is selected at each station. Multiple sections of the build alternatives would traverse the Santa Monica Fault and would be susceptible to possible surface fault rupture hazard. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100353, pages Draft EIS (Volume 1)--842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 SP - ages Draft EIS (Volume 1) EP - -842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27 VL - 13 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133525?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=ages+Draft+EIS+%28Volume+1%29&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 12 of 35] T2 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133521; 14625-3_0012 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Metro Purple Line and Metro Red Line heavy rail subway from its current westernmost termini toward west Los Angeles and Santa Monica, Los Angeles County, California is proposed. The Westside Subway Extension Transit Corridor Project results from nearly 30 years of planning and environmental review. The study area encompasses 38 square miles in western Los Angeles County and includes portions of five jurisdictions: the Cities of Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Currently, large population and employment centers are scattered throughout 15 existing major activity centers in the corridor. These activity centers are served by extremely congested road networks that will deteriorate further with the projected increase in population of 51,000 and the 58,000 additional jobs in the corridor by 2035. The current high level of transit usage is projected to increase by 29 percent between 2006 and 2035. The Westside project would extend the Metro Purple Line/Metro Red Line from its current western termini at Wilshire/Western Station and Hollywood/Highland Station to a new western terminus either in Westwood near the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), the West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital, or the City of Santa Monica. Alternatives considered in this draft EIS include a No Build Alternative, a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Alternative, five build alternatives with six options, and two minimum operable segments (MOS). The TSM Alternative would include more frequent bus service. The build alternatives would overlay heavy rail transit (HRT) on the rail and bus networks. Trains would operate in an exclusive grade-separated right-of-way, picking up electrical power from a third rail adjacent to and parallel with the running rail. The separated right-of-way would be all in a tunnel, with the top of the tunnel being a minimum 30 to 70 feet below the ground. No crossings of the right-of-way would be permitted in the same plane with HRT operations. HRT stations would be accessed from street-level entrances by stairs, escalators, and elevators that would bring patrons to a mezzanine level where ticketing functions would be located. In addition to the alternative termini for the proposed extension, alignment and station location options are considered and two MOS options are evaluated in the event of a decision to build the project in phases. Estimated capital costs of the build alternatives in 2009 dollars range from $4.04 billion to $8.75 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: HRT technology would allow very high passenger-carrying capacity of up to 1,000 passengers per train and maximum speed of 70 miles per hour. Implementation would reduce traffic congestion on roads, improve transit travel time, and provide more reliable transit service to the 286,246 transit riders who travel through the corridor today. Access to major activity and employment centers and transportation equity would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction impacts would include traffic and access disruptions near station sites, temporary sidewalk and bicycle lane closures, construction noise and emissions of nitrogen oxide and particulate matter, temporary removal of parking, visual effects, and haul trucks removing material excavated from the tunnel and station boxes. Each of the five build alternatives would displace one or more properties and could result in adverse effect on historic properties at the proposed Wilshire/Rodeo Station. Some business displacement would occur. The total number of jobs displaced would depend on which portal location is selected at each station. Multiple sections of the build alternatives would traverse the Santa Monica Fault and would be susceptible to possible surface fault rupture hazard. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100353, pages Draft EIS (Volume 1)--842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 SP - ages Draft EIS (Volume 1) EP - -842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133521?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=ages+Draft+EIS+%28Volume+1%29&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 11 of 35] T2 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133518; 14625-3_0011 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Metro Purple Line and Metro Red Line heavy rail subway from its current westernmost termini toward west Los Angeles and Santa Monica, Los Angeles County, California is proposed. The Westside Subway Extension Transit Corridor Project results from nearly 30 years of planning and environmental review. The study area encompasses 38 square miles in western Los Angeles County and includes portions of five jurisdictions: the Cities of Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Currently, large population and employment centers are scattered throughout 15 existing major activity centers in the corridor. These activity centers are served by extremely congested road networks that will deteriorate further with the projected increase in population of 51,000 and the 58,000 additional jobs in the corridor by 2035. The current high level of transit usage is projected to increase by 29 percent between 2006 and 2035. The Westside project would extend the Metro Purple Line/Metro Red Line from its current western termini at Wilshire/Western Station and Hollywood/Highland Station to a new western terminus either in Westwood near the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), the West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital, or the City of Santa Monica. Alternatives considered in this draft EIS include a No Build Alternative, a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Alternative, five build alternatives with six options, and two minimum operable segments (MOS). The TSM Alternative would include more frequent bus service. The build alternatives would overlay heavy rail transit (HRT) on the rail and bus networks. Trains would operate in an exclusive grade-separated right-of-way, picking up electrical power from a third rail adjacent to and parallel with the running rail. The separated right-of-way would be all in a tunnel, with the top of the tunnel being a minimum 30 to 70 feet below the ground. No crossings of the right-of-way would be permitted in the same plane with HRT operations. HRT stations would be accessed from street-level entrances by stairs, escalators, and elevators that would bring patrons to a mezzanine level where ticketing functions would be located. In addition to the alternative termini for the proposed extension, alignment and station location options are considered and two MOS options are evaluated in the event of a decision to build the project in phases. Estimated capital costs of the build alternatives in 2009 dollars range from $4.04 billion to $8.75 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: HRT technology would allow very high passenger-carrying capacity of up to 1,000 passengers per train and maximum speed of 70 miles per hour. Implementation would reduce traffic congestion on roads, improve transit travel time, and provide more reliable transit service to the 286,246 transit riders who travel through the corridor today. Access to major activity and employment centers and transportation equity would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction impacts would include traffic and access disruptions near station sites, temporary sidewalk and bicycle lane closures, construction noise and emissions of nitrogen oxide and particulate matter, temporary removal of parking, visual effects, and haul trucks removing material excavated from the tunnel and station boxes. Each of the five build alternatives would displace one or more properties and could result in adverse effect on historic properties at the proposed Wilshire/Rodeo Station. Some business displacement would occur. The total number of jobs displaced would depend on which portal location is selected at each station. Multiple sections of the build alternatives would traverse the Santa Monica Fault and would be susceptible to possible surface fault rupture hazard. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100353, pages Draft EIS (Volume 1)--842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 SP - ages Draft EIS (Volume 1) EP - -842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133518?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=ages+Draft+EIS+%28Volume+1%29&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DESERTXPRESS HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER TRAIN: VICTORVILLE, CALIFORNIA TO LAS VEGAS, NEVADA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2009). [Part 8 of 8] T2 - DESERTXPRESS HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER TRAIN: VICTORVILLE, CALIFORNIA TO LAS VEGAS, NEVADA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2009). AN - 873133419; 14627-5_0008 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a privately financed, fully grade-separated, dedicated double-track passenger railroad, to be known as the DesertXpress, along a 200-mile corridor from Victorville, California to Las Vegas, Nevada are proposed. High and increasing travel demand along Interstate 15 (I-15), which parallels the proposed railroad alignment, and constraints on the expansion of air travel indicate the need for an alternative mode of passenger transportation along this route. I-15 has also been the site of frequent accidents. The draft EIS of March 2009 considered two rail alignment alternatives and a No Action Alternative. Alternative A would provide for construction of the railroad within the median of the I-15 freeway, while Alternative B would provide for a rail line that would lie within the fenced area of the I-15 rights-of-way, adjacent to automobile travel lanes. In addition to the rail line, the project would include passenger stations in Victorville and Las Vegas, operations and maintenance facilities in Victorville and Las Vegas, and a maintenance of way facility in Baker, California. Two locomotive technology options are under consideration, specifically, diesel/electric multiple unit (DEMU) and electric multiple unit (EMU) train sets. The DEMU train set would be able to reach a maximum speed of 125 miles per hour (mph), while the EMU would be able to reach a maximum speed of 150 mph. Following the publication of the draft EIS, DesertXpress Enterprises, LLC proposed several modifications and additions to address comments received during public and agency review. This supplemental draft EIS addresses the proposed modifications which include a new Victorville passenger station site option, a Barstow area rail alignment following I-15 from Lenwood through Yermo, a new rail alignment through the Clark Mountains near the Mojave National Preserve, new sites for maintenance and operation facilities in unincorporated Clark County, relocation of portions of the rail alignment in metropolitan Las Vegas from the immediate I-15 corridor to the Industrial Road/Dean Martin Drive corridor, and other minor shifts in the rail alignment. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The rail line would provide proven high-speed rail technology and a convenient alternative to the use of the congested I-15 freeway and the declining air connections between the termini. Rail operations would provide 361 to 463 permanent jobs. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would displace desert tortoise and Mojave ground squirrel habitat, present a barrier to wildlife movement, and result in mortality and disturbance amongst Mojave fringe-toed lizards, nesting raptors, migratory birds, banded gila monsters, burrowing owls, roosting bats, desert bighorn sheep, and American badgers. Two historic sites and numerous archaeological sites would be impacted. Approximately 3.37 acres of agricultural land would be directly impacted, and 6.75 acres indirectly impacted. The rights-of-way could encroach on up to 50 acres of 100-year floodplain and 10,000 linear feet of stream channel. Minority groups would experience disproportionate impacts in the vicinity of the Victorville Station and operations and maintenance facility sites. Traffic congestion would increase in the vicinity of the Victorville Station. The rail corridor would lie within an area affected by high seismic activity. From 50 to 80 sensitive receptor sites along the line would experience noise and vibration levels in excess of federal standards. Construction workers would encounter 13 to 15 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0193D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100355, Volume I--463 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--1,192 pages, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Birds KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Employment KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Nevada KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Districts KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133419?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2009%29.&rft.title=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DESERTXPRESS HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER TRAIN: VICTORVILLE, CALIFORNIA TO LAS VEGAS, NEVADA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2009). [Part 7 of 8] T2 - DESERTXPRESS HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER TRAIN: VICTORVILLE, CALIFORNIA TO LAS VEGAS, NEVADA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2009). AN - 873133413; 14627-5_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a privately financed, fully grade-separated, dedicated double-track passenger railroad, to be known as the DesertXpress, along a 200-mile corridor from Victorville, California to Las Vegas, Nevada are proposed. High and increasing travel demand along Interstate 15 (I-15), which parallels the proposed railroad alignment, and constraints on the expansion of air travel indicate the need for an alternative mode of passenger transportation along this route. I-15 has also been the site of frequent accidents. The draft EIS of March 2009 considered two rail alignment alternatives and a No Action Alternative. Alternative A would provide for construction of the railroad within the median of the I-15 freeway, while Alternative B would provide for a rail line that would lie within the fenced area of the I-15 rights-of-way, adjacent to automobile travel lanes. In addition to the rail line, the project would include passenger stations in Victorville and Las Vegas, operations and maintenance facilities in Victorville and Las Vegas, and a maintenance of way facility in Baker, California. Two locomotive technology options are under consideration, specifically, diesel/electric multiple unit (DEMU) and electric multiple unit (EMU) train sets. The DEMU train set would be able to reach a maximum speed of 125 miles per hour (mph), while the EMU would be able to reach a maximum speed of 150 mph. Following the publication of the draft EIS, DesertXpress Enterprises, LLC proposed several modifications and additions to address comments received during public and agency review. This supplemental draft EIS addresses the proposed modifications which include a new Victorville passenger station site option, a Barstow area rail alignment following I-15 from Lenwood through Yermo, a new rail alignment through the Clark Mountains near the Mojave National Preserve, new sites for maintenance and operation facilities in unincorporated Clark County, relocation of portions of the rail alignment in metropolitan Las Vegas from the immediate I-15 corridor to the Industrial Road/Dean Martin Drive corridor, and other minor shifts in the rail alignment. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The rail line would provide proven high-speed rail technology and a convenient alternative to the use of the congested I-15 freeway and the declining air connections between the termini. Rail operations would provide 361 to 463 permanent jobs. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would displace desert tortoise and Mojave ground squirrel habitat, present a barrier to wildlife movement, and result in mortality and disturbance amongst Mojave fringe-toed lizards, nesting raptors, migratory birds, banded gila monsters, burrowing owls, roosting bats, desert bighorn sheep, and American badgers. Two historic sites and numerous archaeological sites would be impacted. Approximately 3.37 acres of agricultural land would be directly impacted, and 6.75 acres indirectly impacted. The rights-of-way could encroach on up to 50 acres of 100-year floodplain and 10,000 linear feet of stream channel. Minority groups would experience disproportionate impacts in the vicinity of the Victorville Station and operations and maintenance facility sites. Traffic congestion would increase in the vicinity of the Victorville Station. The rail corridor would lie within an area affected by high seismic activity. From 50 to 80 sensitive receptor sites along the line would experience noise and vibration levels in excess of federal standards. Construction workers would encounter 13 to 15 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0193D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100355, Volume I--463 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--1,192 pages, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Birds KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Employment KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Nevada KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Districts KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133413?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2009%29.&rft.title=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DESERTXPRESS HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER TRAIN: VICTORVILLE, CALIFORNIA TO LAS VEGAS, NEVADA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2009). [Part 6 of 8] T2 - DESERTXPRESS HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER TRAIN: VICTORVILLE, CALIFORNIA TO LAS VEGAS, NEVADA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2009). AN - 873133408; 14627-5_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a privately financed, fully grade-separated, dedicated double-track passenger railroad, to be known as the DesertXpress, along a 200-mile corridor from Victorville, California to Las Vegas, Nevada are proposed. High and increasing travel demand along Interstate 15 (I-15), which parallels the proposed railroad alignment, and constraints on the expansion of air travel indicate the need for an alternative mode of passenger transportation along this route. I-15 has also been the site of frequent accidents. The draft EIS of March 2009 considered two rail alignment alternatives and a No Action Alternative. Alternative A would provide for construction of the railroad within the median of the I-15 freeway, while Alternative B would provide for a rail line that would lie within the fenced area of the I-15 rights-of-way, adjacent to automobile travel lanes. In addition to the rail line, the project would include passenger stations in Victorville and Las Vegas, operations and maintenance facilities in Victorville and Las Vegas, and a maintenance of way facility in Baker, California. Two locomotive technology options are under consideration, specifically, diesel/electric multiple unit (DEMU) and electric multiple unit (EMU) train sets. The DEMU train set would be able to reach a maximum speed of 125 miles per hour (mph), while the EMU would be able to reach a maximum speed of 150 mph. Following the publication of the draft EIS, DesertXpress Enterprises, LLC proposed several modifications and additions to address comments received during public and agency review. This supplemental draft EIS addresses the proposed modifications which include a new Victorville passenger station site option, a Barstow area rail alignment following I-15 from Lenwood through Yermo, a new rail alignment through the Clark Mountains near the Mojave National Preserve, new sites for maintenance and operation facilities in unincorporated Clark County, relocation of portions of the rail alignment in metropolitan Las Vegas from the immediate I-15 corridor to the Industrial Road/Dean Martin Drive corridor, and other minor shifts in the rail alignment. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The rail line would provide proven high-speed rail technology and a convenient alternative to the use of the congested I-15 freeway and the declining air connections between the termini. Rail operations would provide 361 to 463 permanent jobs. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would displace desert tortoise and Mojave ground squirrel habitat, present a barrier to wildlife movement, and result in mortality and disturbance amongst Mojave fringe-toed lizards, nesting raptors, migratory birds, banded gila monsters, burrowing owls, roosting bats, desert bighorn sheep, and American badgers. Two historic sites and numerous archaeological sites would be impacted. Approximately 3.37 acres of agricultural land would be directly impacted, and 6.75 acres indirectly impacted. The rights-of-way could encroach on up to 50 acres of 100-year floodplain and 10,000 linear feet of stream channel. Minority groups would experience disproportionate impacts in the vicinity of the Victorville Station and operations and maintenance facility sites. Traffic congestion would increase in the vicinity of the Victorville Station. The rail corridor would lie within an area affected by high seismic activity. From 50 to 80 sensitive receptor sites along the line would experience noise and vibration levels in excess of federal standards. Construction workers would encounter 13 to 15 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0193D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100355, Volume I--463 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--1,192 pages, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Birds KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Employment KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Nevada KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Districts KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133408?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2009%29.&rft.title=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 47 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133362; 14624-2_0047 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 47 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133362?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 46 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133353; 14624-2_0046 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 46 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133353?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 45 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133349; 14624-2_0045 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 45 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133349?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 35 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133343; 14624-2_0035 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 35 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133343?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=Academic+Emergency+Medicine&rft.issn=10696563&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 34 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133337; 14624-2_0034 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 34 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133337?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 33 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133333; 14624-2_0033 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 33 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133333?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 25 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133323; 14624-2_0025 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 25 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133323?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 24 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133314; 14624-2_0024 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 24 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133314?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 17 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133301; 14624-2_0017 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 17 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133301?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 16 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133295; 14624-2_0016 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 16 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133295?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 15 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133290; 14624-2_0015 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133290?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 14 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133280; 14624-2_0014 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133280?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 3 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133264; 14624-2_0003 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133264?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 2 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133255; 14624-2_0002 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133255?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 1 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133247; 14624-2_0001 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133247?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DESERTXPRESS HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER TRAIN: VICTORVILLE, CALIFORNIA TO LAS VEGAS, NEVADA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2009). [Part 5 of 8] T2 - DESERTXPRESS HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER TRAIN: VICTORVILLE, CALIFORNIA TO LAS VEGAS, NEVADA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2009). AN - 873132866; 14627-5_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a privately financed, fully grade-separated, dedicated double-track passenger railroad, to be known as the DesertXpress, along a 200-mile corridor from Victorville, California to Las Vegas, Nevada are proposed. High and increasing travel demand along Interstate 15 (I-15), which parallels the proposed railroad alignment, and constraints on the expansion of air travel indicate the need for an alternative mode of passenger transportation along this route. I-15 has also been the site of frequent accidents. The draft EIS of March 2009 considered two rail alignment alternatives and a No Action Alternative. Alternative A would provide for construction of the railroad within the median of the I-15 freeway, while Alternative B would provide for a rail line that would lie within the fenced area of the I-15 rights-of-way, adjacent to automobile travel lanes. In addition to the rail line, the project would include passenger stations in Victorville and Las Vegas, operations and maintenance facilities in Victorville and Las Vegas, and a maintenance of way facility in Baker, California. Two locomotive technology options are under consideration, specifically, diesel/electric multiple unit (DEMU) and electric multiple unit (EMU) train sets. The DEMU train set would be able to reach a maximum speed of 125 miles per hour (mph), while the EMU would be able to reach a maximum speed of 150 mph. Following the publication of the draft EIS, DesertXpress Enterprises, LLC proposed several modifications and additions to address comments received during public and agency review. This supplemental draft EIS addresses the proposed modifications which include a new Victorville passenger station site option, a Barstow area rail alignment following I-15 from Lenwood through Yermo, a new rail alignment through the Clark Mountains near the Mojave National Preserve, new sites for maintenance and operation facilities in unincorporated Clark County, relocation of portions of the rail alignment in metropolitan Las Vegas from the immediate I-15 corridor to the Industrial Road/Dean Martin Drive corridor, and other minor shifts in the rail alignment. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The rail line would provide proven high-speed rail technology and a convenient alternative to the use of the congested I-15 freeway and the declining air connections between the termini. Rail operations would provide 361 to 463 permanent jobs. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would displace desert tortoise and Mojave ground squirrel habitat, present a barrier to wildlife movement, and result in mortality and disturbance amongst Mojave fringe-toed lizards, nesting raptors, migratory birds, banded gila monsters, burrowing owls, roosting bats, desert bighorn sheep, and American badgers. Two historic sites and numerous archaeological sites would be impacted. Approximately 3.37 acres of agricultural land would be directly impacted, and 6.75 acres indirectly impacted. The rights-of-way could encroach on up to 50 acres of 100-year floodplain and 10,000 linear feet of stream channel. Minority groups would experience disproportionate impacts in the vicinity of the Victorville Station and operations and maintenance facility sites. Traffic congestion would increase in the vicinity of the Victorville Station. The rail corridor would lie within an area affected by high seismic activity. From 50 to 80 sensitive receptor sites along the line would experience noise and vibration levels in excess of federal standards. Construction workers would encounter 13 to 15 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0193D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100355, Volume I--463 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--1,192 pages, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Birds KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Employment KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Nevada KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Districts KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132866?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2009%29.&rft.title=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DESERTXPRESS HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER TRAIN: VICTORVILLE, CALIFORNIA TO LAS VEGAS, NEVADA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2009). [Part 4 of 8] T2 - DESERTXPRESS HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER TRAIN: VICTORVILLE, CALIFORNIA TO LAS VEGAS, NEVADA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2009). AN - 873132863; 14627-5_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a privately financed, fully grade-separated, dedicated double-track passenger railroad, to be known as the DesertXpress, along a 200-mile corridor from Victorville, California to Las Vegas, Nevada are proposed. High and increasing travel demand along Interstate 15 (I-15), which parallels the proposed railroad alignment, and constraints on the expansion of air travel indicate the need for an alternative mode of passenger transportation along this route. I-15 has also been the site of frequent accidents. The draft EIS of March 2009 considered two rail alignment alternatives and a No Action Alternative. Alternative A would provide for construction of the railroad within the median of the I-15 freeway, while Alternative B would provide for a rail line that would lie within the fenced area of the I-15 rights-of-way, adjacent to automobile travel lanes. In addition to the rail line, the project would include passenger stations in Victorville and Las Vegas, operations and maintenance facilities in Victorville and Las Vegas, and a maintenance of way facility in Baker, California. Two locomotive technology options are under consideration, specifically, diesel/electric multiple unit (DEMU) and electric multiple unit (EMU) train sets. The DEMU train set would be able to reach a maximum speed of 125 miles per hour (mph), while the EMU would be able to reach a maximum speed of 150 mph. Following the publication of the draft EIS, DesertXpress Enterprises, LLC proposed several modifications and additions to address comments received during public and agency review. This supplemental draft EIS addresses the proposed modifications which include a new Victorville passenger station site option, a Barstow area rail alignment following I-15 from Lenwood through Yermo, a new rail alignment through the Clark Mountains near the Mojave National Preserve, new sites for maintenance and operation facilities in unincorporated Clark County, relocation of portions of the rail alignment in metropolitan Las Vegas from the immediate I-15 corridor to the Industrial Road/Dean Martin Drive corridor, and other minor shifts in the rail alignment. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The rail line would provide proven high-speed rail technology and a convenient alternative to the use of the congested I-15 freeway and the declining air connections between the termini. Rail operations would provide 361 to 463 permanent jobs. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would displace desert tortoise and Mojave ground squirrel habitat, present a barrier to wildlife movement, and result in mortality and disturbance amongst Mojave fringe-toed lizards, nesting raptors, migratory birds, banded gila monsters, burrowing owls, roosting bats, desert bighorn sheep, and American badgers. Two historic sites and numerous archaeological sites would be impacted. Approximately 3.37 acres of agricultural land would be directly impacted, and 6.75 acres indirectly impacted. The rights-of-way could encroach on up to 50 acres of 100-year floodplain and 10,000 linear feet of stream channel. Minority groups would experience disproportionate impacts in the vicinity of the Victorville Station and operations and maintenance facility sites. Traffic congestion would increase in the vicinity of the Victorville Station. The rail corridor would lie within an area affected by high seismic activity. From 50 to 80 sensitive receptor sites along the line would experience noise and vibration levels in excess of federal standards. Construction workers would encounter 13 to 15 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0193D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100355, Volume I--463 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--1,192 pages, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Birds KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Employment KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Nevada KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Districts KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132863?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2009%29.&rft.title=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DESERTXPRESS HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER TRAIN: VICTORVILLE, CALIFORNIA TO LAS VEGAS, NEVADA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2009). [Part 3 of 8] T2 - DESERTXPRESS HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER TRAIN: VICTORVILLE, CALIFORNIA TO LAS VEGAS, NEVADA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2009). AN - 873132859; 14627-5_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a privately financed, fully grade-separated, dedicated double-track passenger railroad, to be known as the DesertXpress, along a 200-mile corridor from Victorville, California to Las Vegas, Nevada are proposed. High and increasing travel demand along Interstate 15 (I-15), which parallels the proposed railroad alignment, and constraints on the expansion of air travel indicate the need for an alternative mode of passenger transportation along this route. I-15 has also been the site of frequent accidents. The draft EIS of March 2009 considered two rail alignment alternatives and a No Action Alternative. Alternative A would provide for construction of the railroad within the median of the I-15 freeway, while Alternative B would provide for a rail line that would lie within the fenced area of the I-15 rights-of-way, adjacent to automobile travel lanes. In addition to the rail line, the project would include passenger stations in Victorville and Las Vegas, operations and maintenance facilities in Victorville and Las Vegas, and a maintenance of way facility in Baker, California. Two locomotive technology options are under consideration, specifically, diesel/electric multiple unit (DEMU) and electric multiple unit (EMU) train sets. The DEMU train set would be able to reach a maximum speed of 125 miles per hour (mph), while the EMU would be able to reach a maximum speed of 150 mph. Following the publication of the draft EIS, DesertXpress Enterprises, LLC proposed several modifications and additions to address comments received during public and agency review. This supplemental draft EIS addresses the proposed modifications which include a new Victorville passenger station site option, a Barstow area rail alignment following I-15 from Lenwood through Yermo, a new rail alignment through the Clark Mountains near the Mojave National Preserve, new sites for maintenance and operation facilities in unincorporated Clark County, relocation of portions of the rail alignment in metropolitan Las Vegas from the immediate I-15 corridor to the Industrial Road/Dean Martin Drive corridor, and other minor shifts in the rail alignment. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The rail line would provide proven high-speed rail technology and a convenient alternative to the use of the congested I-15 freeway and the declining air connections between the termini. Rail operations would provide 361 to 463 permanent jobs. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would displace desert tortoise and Mojave ground squirrel habitat, present a barrier to wildlife movement, and result in mortality and disturbance amongst Mojave fringe-toed lizards, nesting raptors, migratory birds, banded gila monsters, burrowing owls, roosting bats, desert bighorn sheep, and American badgers. Two historic sites and numerous archaeological sites would be impacted. Approximately 3.37 acres of agricultural land would be directly impacted, and 6.75 acres indirectly impacted. The rights-of-way could encroach on up to 50 acres of 100-year floodplain and 10,000 linear feet of stream channel. Minority groups would experience disproportionate impacts in the vicinity of the Victorville Station and operations and maintenance facility sites. Traffic congestion would increase in the vicinity of the Victorville Station. The rail corridor would lie within an area affected by high seismic activity. From 50 to 80 sensitive receptor sites along the line would experience noise and vibration levels in excess of federal standards. Construction workers would encounter 13 to 15 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0193D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100355, Volume I--463 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--1,192 pages, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Birds KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Employment KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Nevada KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Districts KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132859?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2009%29.&rft.title=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DESERTXPRESS HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER TRAIN: VICTORVILLE, CALIFORNIA TO LAS VEGAS, NEVADA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2009). [Part 2 of 8] T2 - DESERTXPRESS HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER TRAIN: VICTORVILLE, CALIFORNIA TO LAS VEGAS, NEVADA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2009). AN - 873132855; 14627-5_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a privately financed, fully grade-separated, dedicated double-track passenger railroad, to be known as the DesertXpress, along a 200-mile corridor from Victorville, California to Las Vegas, Nevada are proposed. High and increasing travel demand along Interstate 15 (I-15), which parallels the proposed railroad alignment, and constraints on the expansion of air travel indicate the need for an alternative mode of passenger transportation along this route. I-15 has also been the site of frequent accidents. The draft EIS of March 2009 considered two rail alignment alternatives and a No Action Alternative. Alternative A would provide for construction of the railroad within the median of the I-15 freeway, while Alternative B would provide for a rail line that would lie within the fenced area of the I-15 rights-of-way, adjacent to automobile travel lanes. In addition to the rail line, the project would include passenger stations in Victorville and Las Vegas, operations and maintenance facilities in Victorville and Las Vegas, and a maintenance of way facility in Baker, California. Two locomotive technology options are under consideration, specifically, diesel/electric multiple unit (DEMU) and electric multiple unit (EMU) train sets. The DEMU train set would be able to reach a maximum speed of 125 miles per hour (mph), while the EMU would be able to reach a maximum speed of 150 mph. Following the publication of the draft EIS, DesertXpress Enterprises, LLC proposed several modifications and additions to address comments received during public and agency review. This supplemental draft EIS addresses the proposed modifications which include a new Victorville passenger station site option, a Barstow area rail alignment following I-15 from Lenwood through Yermo, a new rail alignment through the Clark Mountains near the Mojave National Preserve, new sites for maintenance and operation facilities in unincorporated Clark County, relocation of portions of the rail alignment in metropolitan Las Vegas from the immediate I-15 corridor to the Industrial Road/Dean Martin Drive corridor, and other minor shifts in the rail alignment. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The rail line would provide proven high-speed rail technology and a convenient alternative to the use of the congested I-15 freeway and the declining air connections between the termini. Rail operations would provide 361 to 463 permanent jobs. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would displace desert tortoise and Mojave ground squirrel habitat, present a barrier to wildlife movement, and result in mortality and disturbance amongst Mojave fringe-toed lizards, nesting raptors, migratory birds, banded gila monsters, burrowing owls, roosting bats, desert bighorn sheep, and American badgers. Two historic sites and numerous archaeological sites would be impacted. Approximately 3.37 acres of agricultural land would be directly impacted, and 6.75 acres indirectly impacted. The rights-of-way could encroach on up to 50 acres of 100-year floodplain and 10,000 linear feet of stream channel. Minority groups would experience disproportionate impacts in the vicinity of the Victorville Station and operations and maintenance facility sites. Traffic congestion would increase in the vicinity of the Victorville Station. The rail corridor would lie within an area affected by high seismic activity. From 50 to 80 sensitive receptor sites along the line would experience noise and vibration levels in excess of federal standards. Construction workers would encounter 13 to 15 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0193D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100355, Volume I--463 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--1,192 pages, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Birds KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Employment KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Nevada KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Districts KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132855?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2009%29.&rft.title=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DESERTXPRESS HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER TRAIN: VICTORVILLE, CALIFORNIA TO LAS VEGAS, NEVADA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2009). [Part 1 of 8] T2 - DESERTXPRESS HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER TRAIN: VICTORVILLE, CALIFORNIA TO LAS VEGAS, NEVADA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2009). AN - 873132844; 14627-5_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a privately financed, fully grade-separated, dedicated double-track passenger railroad, to be known as the DesertXpress, along a 200-mile corridor from Victorville, California to Las Vegas, Nevada are proposed. High and increasing travel demand along Interstate 15 (I-15), which parallels the proposed railroad alignment, and constraints on the expansion of air travel indicate the need for an alternative mode of passenger transportation along this route. I-15 has also been the site of frequent accidents. The draft EIS of March 2009 considered two rail alignment alternatives and a No Action Alternative. Alternative A would provide for construction of the railroad within the median of the I-15 freeway, while Alternative B would provide for a rail line that would lie within the fenced area of the I-15 rights-of-way, adjacent to automobile travel lanes. In addition to the rail line, the project would include passenger stations in Victorville and Las Vegas, operations and maintenance facilities in Victorville and Las Vegas, and a maintenance of way facility in Baker, California. Two locomotive technology options are under consideration, specifically, diesel/electric multiple unit (DEMU) and electric multiple unit (EMU) train sets. The DEMU train set would be able to reach a maximum speed of 125 miles per hour (mph), while the EMU would be able to reach a maximum speed of 150 mph. Following the publication of the draft EIS, DesertXpress Enterprises, LLC proposed several modifications and additions to address comments received during public and agency review. This supplemental draft EIS addresses the proposed modifications which include a new Victorville passenger station site option, a Barstow area rail alignment following I-15 from Lenwood through Yermo, a new rail alignment through the Clark Mountains near the Mojave National Preserve, new sites for maintenance and operation facilities in unincorporated Clark County, relocation of portions of the rail alignment in metropolitan Las Vegas from the immediate I-15 corridor to the Industrial Road/Dean Martin Drive corridor, and other minor shifts in the rail alignment. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The rail line would provide proven high-speed rail technology and a convenient alternative to the use of the congested I-15 freeway and the declining air connections between the termini. Rail operations would provide 361 to 463 permanent jobs. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would displace desert tortoise and Mojave ground squirrel habitat, present a barrier to wildlife movement, and result in mortality and disturbance amongst Mojave fringe-toed lizards, nesting raptors, migratory birds, banded gila monsters, burrowing owls, roosting bats, desert bighorn sheep, and American badgers. Two historic sites and numerous archaeological sites would be impacted. Approximately 3.37 acres of agricultural land would be directly impacted, and 6.75 acres indirectly impacted. The rights-of-way could encroach on up to 50 acres of 100-year floodplain and 10,000 linear feet of stream channel. Minority groups would experience disproportionate impacts in the vicinity of the Victorville Station and operations and maintenance facility sites. Traffic congestion would increase in the vicinity of the Victorville Station. The rail corridor would lie within an area affected by high seismic activity. From 50 to 80 sensitive receptor sites along the line would experience noise and vibration levels in excess of federal standards. Construction workers would encounter 13 to 15 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0193D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100355, Volume I--463 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--1,192 pages, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Birds KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Employment KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Nevada KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Districts KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132844?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2009%29.&rft.title=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 39 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132742; 14624-2_0039 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 39 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132742?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 38 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132732; 14624-2_0038 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 38 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132732?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 37 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132721; 14624-2_0037 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 37 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132721?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 27 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132696; 14624-2_0027 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 27 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132696?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 12 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132682; 14624-2_0012 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132682?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 10 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132666; 14624-2_0010 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132666?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 18 of 35] T2 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132660; 14625-3_0018 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Metro Purple Line and Metro Red Line heavy rail subway from its current westernmost termini toward west Los Angeles and Santa Monica, Los Angeles County, California is proposed. The Westside Subway Extension Transit Corridor Project results from nearly 30 years of planning and environmental review. The study area encompasses 38 square miles in western Los Angeles County and includes portions of five jurisdictions: the Cities of Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Currently, large population and employment centers are scattered throughout 15 existing major activity centers in the corridor. These activity centers are served by extremely congested road networks that will deteriorate further with the projected increase in population of 51,000 and the 58,000 additional jobs in the corridor by 2035. The current high level of transit usage is projected to increase by 29 percent between 2006 and 2035. The Westside project would extend the Metro Purple Line/Metro Red Line from its current western termini at Wilshire/Western Station and Hollywood/Highland Station to a new western terminus either in Westwood near the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), the West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital, or the City of Santa Monica. Alternatives considered in this draft EIS include a No Build Alternative, a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Alternative, five build alternatives with six options, and two minimum operable segments (MOS). The TSM Alternative would include more frequent bus service. The build alternatives would overlay heavy rail transit (HRT) on the rail and bus networks. Trains would operate in an exclusive grade-separated right-of-way, picking up electrical power from a third rail adjacent to and parallel with the running rail. The separated right-of-way would be all in a tunnel, with the top of the tunnel being a minimum 30 to 70 feet below the ground. No crossings of the right-of-way would be permitted in the same plane with HRT operations. HRT stations would be accessed from street-level entrances by stairs, escalators, and elevators that would bring patrons to a mezzanine level where ticketing functions would be located. In addition to the alternative termini for the proposed extension, alignment and station location options are considered and two MOS options are evaluated in the event of a decision to build the project in phases. Estimated capital costs of the build alternatives in 2009 dollars range from $4.04 billion to $8.75 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: HRT technology would allow very high passenger-carrying capacity of up to 1,000 passengers per train and maximum speed of 70 miles per hour. Implementation would reduce traffic congestion on roads, improve transit travel time, and provide more reliable transit service to the 286,246 transit riders who travel through the corridor today. Access to major activity and employment centers and transportation equity would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction impacts would include traffic and access disruptions near station sites, temporary sidewalk and bicycle lane closures, construction noise and emissions of nitrogen oxide and particulate matter, temporary removal of parking, visual effects, and haul trucks removing material excavated from the tunnel and station boxes. Each of the five build alternatives would displace one or more properties and could result in adverse effect on historic properties at the proposed Wilshire/Rodeo Station. Some business displacement would occur. The total number of jobs displaced would depend on which portal location is selected at each station. Multiple sections of the build alternatives would traverse the Santa Monica Fault and would be susceptible to possible surface fault rupture hazard. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100353, pages Draft EIS (Volume 1)--842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 SP - ages Draft EIS (Volume 1) EP - -842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27 VL - 18 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132660?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=ages+Draft+EIS+%28Volume+1%29&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 9 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132646; 14624-2_0009 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132646?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 10 of 35] T2 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132617; 14625-3_0010 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Metro Purple Line and Metro Red Line heavy rail subway from its current westernmost termini toward west Los Angeles and Santa Monica, Los Angeles County, California is proposed. The Westside Subway Extension Transit Corridor Project results from nearly 30 years of planning and environmental review. The study area encompasses 38 square miles in western Los Angeles County and includes portions of five jurisdictions: the Cities of Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Currently, large population and employment centers are scattered throughout 15 existing major activity centers in the corridor. These activity centers are served by extremely congested road networks that will deteriorate further with the projected increase in population of 51,000 and the 58,000 additional jobs in the corridor by 2035. The current high level of transit usage is projected to increase by 29 percent between 2006 and 2035. The Westside project would extend the Metro Purple Line/Metro Red Line from its current western termini at Wilshire/Western Station and Hollywood/Highland Station to a new western terminus either in Westwood near the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), the West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital, or the City of Santa Monica. Alternatives considered in this draft EIS include a No Build Alternative, a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Alternative, five build alternatives with six options, and two minimum operable segments (MOS). The TSM Alternative would include more frequent bus service. The build alternatives would overlay heavy rail transit (HRT) on the rail and bus networks. Trains would operate in an exclusive grade-separated right-of-way, picking up electrical power from a third rail adjacent to and parallel with the running rail. The separated right-of-way would be all in a tunnel, with the top of the tunnel being a minimum 30 to 70 feet below the ground. No crossings of the right-of-way would be permitted in the same plane with HRT operations. HRT stations would be accessed from street-level entrances by stairs, escalators, and elevators that would bring patrons to a mezzanine level where ticketing functions would be located. In addition to the alternative termini for the proposed extension, alignment and station location options are considered and two MOS options are evaluated in the event of a decision to build the project in phases. Estimated capital costs of the build alternatives in 2009 dollars range from $4.04 billion to $8.75 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: HRT technology would allow very high passenger-carrying capacity of up to 1,000 passengers per train and maximum speed of 70 miles per hour. Implementation would reduce traffic congestion on roads, improve transit travel time, and provide more reliable transit service to the 286,246 transit riders who travel through the corridor today. Access to major activity and employment centers and transportation equity would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction impacts would include traffic and access disruptions near station sites, temporary sidewalk and bicycle lane closures, construction noise and emissions of nitrogen oxide and particulate matter, temporary removal of parking, visual effects, and haul trucks removing material excavated from the tunnel and station boxes. Each of the five build alternatives would displace one or more properties and could result in adverse effect on historic properties at the proposed Wilshire/Rodeo Station. Some business displacement would occur. The total number of jobs displaced would depend on which portal location is selected at each station. Multiple sections of the build alternatives would traverse the Santa Monica Fault and would be susceptible to possible surface fault rupture hazard. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100353, pages Draft EIS (Volume 1)--842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 SP - ages Draft EIS (Volume 1) EP - -842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132617?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=ages+Draft+EIS+%28Volume+1%29&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 9 of 35] T2 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132614; 14625-3_0009 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Metro Purple Line and Metro Red Line heavy rail subway from its current westernmost termini toward west Los Angeles and Santa Monica, Los Angeles County, California is proposed. The Westside Subway Extension Transit Corridor Project results from nearly 30 years of planning and environmental review. The study area encompasses 38 square miles in western Los Angeles County and includes portions of five jurisdictions: the Cities of Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Currently, large population and employment centers are scattered throughout 15 existing major activity centers in the corridor. These activity centers are served by extremely congested road networks that will deteriorate further with the projected increase in population of 51,000 and the 58,000 additional jobs in the corridor by 2035. The current high level of transit usage is projected to increase by 29 percent between 2006 and 2035. The Westside project would extend the Metro Purple Line/Metro Red Line from its current western termini at Wilshire/Western Station and Hollywood/Highland Station to a new western terminus either in Westwood near the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), the West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital, or the City of Santa Monica. Alternatives considered in this draft EIS include a No Build Alternative, a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Alternative, five build alternatives with six options, and two minimum operable segments (MOS). The TSM Alternative would include more frequent bus service. The build alternatives would overlay heavy rail transit (HRT) on the rail and bus networks. Trains would operate in an exclusive grade-separated right-of-way, picking up electrical power from a third rail adjacent to and parallel with the running rail. The separated right-of-way would be all in a tunnel, with the top of the tunnel being a minimum 30 to 70 feet below the ground. No crossings of the right-of-way would be permitted in the same plane with HRT operations. HRT stations would be accessed from street-level entrances by stairs, escalators, and elevators that would bring patrons to a mezzanine level where ticketing functions would be located. In addition to the alternative termini for the proposed extension, alignment and station location options are considered and two MOS options are evaluated in the event of a decision to build the project in phases. Estimated capital costs of the build alternatives in 2009 dollars range from $4.04 billion to $8.75 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: HRT technology would allow very high passenger-carrying capacity of up to 1,000 passengers per train and maximum speed of 70 miles per hour. Implementation would reduce traffic congestion on roads, improve transit travel time, and provide more reliable transit service to the 286,246 transit riders who travel through the corridor today. Access to major activity and employment centers and transportation equity would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction impacts would include traffic and access disruptions near station sites, temporary sidewalk and bicycle lane closures, construction noise and emissions of nitrogen oxide and particulate matter, temporary removal of parking, visual effects, and haul trucks removing material excavated from the tunnel and station boxes. Each of the five build alternatives would displace one or more properties and could result in adverse effect on historic properties at the proposed Wilshire/Rodeo Station. Some business displacement would occur. The total number of jobs displaced would depend on which portal location is selected at each station. Multiple sections of the build alternatives would traverse the Santa Monica Fault and would be susceptible to possible surface fault rupture hazard. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100353, pages Draft EIS (Volume 1)--842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 SP - ages Draft EIS (Volume 1) EP - -842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132614?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=ages+Draft+EIS+%28Volume+1%29&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 8 of 35] T2 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132610; 14625-3_0008 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Metro Purple Line and Metro Red Line heavy rail subway from its current westernmost termini toward west Los Angeles and Santa Monica, Los Angeles County, California is proposed. The Westside Subway Extension Transit Corridor Project results from nearly 30 years of planning and environmental review. The study area encompasses 38 square miles in western Los Angeles County and includes portions of five jurisdictions: the Cities of Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Currently, large population and employment centers are scattered throughout 15 existing major activity centers in the corridor. These activity centers are served by extremely congested road networks that will deteriorate further with the projected increase in population of 51,000 and the 58,000 additional jobs in the corridor by 2035. The current high level of transit usage is projected to increase by 29 percent between 2006 and 2035. The Westside project would extend the Metro Purple Line/Metro Red Line from its current western termini at Wilshire/Western Station and Hollywood/Highland Station to a new western terminus either in Westwood near the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), the West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital, or the City of Santa Monica. Alternatives considered in this draft EIS include a No Build Alternative, a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Alternative, five build alternatives with six options, and two minimum operable segments (MOS). The TSM Alternative would include more frequent bus service. The build alternatives would overlay heavy rail transit (HRT) on the rail and bus networks. Trains would operate in an exclusive grade-separated right-of-way, picking up electrical power from a third rail adjacent to and parallel with the running rail. The separated right-of-way would be all in a tunnel, with the top of the tunnel being a minimum 30 to 70 feet below the ground. No crossings of the right-of-way would be permitted in the same plane with HRT operations. HRT stations would be accessed from street-level entrances by stairs, escalators, and elevators that would bring patrons to a mezzanine level where ticketing functions would be located. In addition to the alternative termini for the proposed extension, alignment and station location options are considered and two MOS options are evaluated in the event of a decision to build the project in phases. Estimated capital costs of the build alternatives in 2009 dollars range from $4.04 billion to $8.75 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: HRT technology would allow very high passenger-carrying capacity of up to 1,000 passengers per train and maximum speed of 70 miles per hour. Implementation would reduce traffic congestion on roads, improve transit travel time, and provide more reliable transit service to the 286,246 transit riders who travel through the corridor today. Access to major activity and employment centers and transportation equity would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction impacts would include traffic and access disruptions near station sites, temporary sidewalk and bicycle lane closures, construction noise and emissions of nitrogen oxide and particulate matter, temporary removal of parking, visual effects, and haul trucks removing material excavated from the tunnel and station boxes. Each of the five build alternatives would displace one or more properties and could result in adverse effect on historic properties at the proposed Wilshire/Rodeo Station. Some business displacement would occur. The total number of jobs displaced would depend on which portal location is selected at each station. Multiple sections of the build alternatives would traverse the Santa Monica Fault and would be susceptible to possible surface fault rupture hazard. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100353, pages Draft EIS (Volume 1)--842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 SP - ages Draft EIS (Volume 1) EP - -842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132610?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=ages+Draft+EIS+%28Volume+1%29&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 7 of 35] T2 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132604; 14625-3_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Metro Purple Line and Metro Red Line heavy rail subway from its current westernmost termini toward west Los Angeles and Santa Monica, Los Angeles County, California is proposed. The Westside Subway Extension Transit Corridor Project results from nearly 30 years of planning and environmental review. The study area encompasses 38 square miles in western Los Angeles County and includes portions of five jurisdictions: the Cities of Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Currently, large population and employment centers are scattered throughout 15 existing major activity centers in the corridor. These activity centers are served by extremely congested road networks that will deteriorate further with the projected increase in population of 51,000 and the 58,000 additional jobs in the corridor by 2035. The current high level of transit usage is projected to increase by 29 percent between 2006 and 2035. The Westside project would extend the Metro Purple Line/Metro Red Line from its current western termini at Wilshire/Western Station and Hollywood/Highland Station to a new western terminus either in Westwood near the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), the West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital, or the City of Santa Monica. Alternatives considered in this draft EIS include a No Build Alternative, a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Alternative, five build alternatives with six options, and two minimum operable segments (MOS). The TSM Alternative would include more frequent bus service. The build alternatives would overlay heavy rail transit (HRT) on the rail and bus networks. Trains would operate in an exclusive grade-separated right-of-way, picking up electrical power from a third rail adjacent to and parallel with the running rail. The separated right-of-way would be all in a tunnel, with the top of the tunnel being a minimum 30 to 70 feet below the ground. No crossings of the right-of-way would be permitted in the same plane with HRT operations. HRT stations would be accessed from street-level entrances by stairs, escalators, and elevators that would bring patrons to a mezzanine level where ticketing functions would be located. In addition to the alternative termini for the proposed extension, alignment and station location options are considered and two MOS options are evaluated in the event of a decision to build the project in phases. Estimated capital costs of the build alternatives in 2009 dollars range from $4.04 billion to $8.75 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: HRT technology would allow very high passenger-carrying capacity of up to 1,000 passengers per train and maximum speed of 70 miles per hour. Implementation would reduce traffic congestion on roads, improve transit travel time, and provide more reliable transit service to the 286,246 transit riders who travel through the corridor today. Access to major activity and employment centers and transportation equity would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction impacts would include traffic and access disruptions near station sites, temporary sidewalk and bicycle lane closures, construction noise and emissions of nitrogen oxide and particulate matter, temporary removal of parking, visual effects, and haul trucks removing material excavated from the tunnel and station boxes. Each of the five build alternatives would displace one or more properties and could result in adverse effect on historic properties at the proposed Wilshire/Rodeo Station. Some business displacement would occur. The total number of jobs displaced would depend on which portal location is selected at each station. Multiple sections of the build alternatives would traverse the Santa Monica Fault and would be susceptible to possible surface fault rupture hazard. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100353, pages Draft EIS (Volume 1)--842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 SP - ages Draft EIS (Volume 1) EP - -842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132604?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=ages+Draft+EIS+%28Volume+1%29&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 6 of 35] T2 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132598; 14625-3_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Metro Purple Line and Metro Red Line heavy rail subway from its current westernmost termini toward west Los Angeles and Santa Monica, Los Angeles County, California is proposed. The Westside Subway Extension Transit Corridor Project results from nearly 30 years of planning and environmental review. The study area encompasses 38 square miles in western Los Angeles County and includes portions of five jurisdictions: the Cities of Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Currently, large population and employment centers are scattered throughout 15 existing major activity centers in the corridor. These activity centers are served by extremely congested road networks that will deteriorate further with the projected increase in population of 51,000 and the 58,000 additional jobs in the corridor by 2035. The current high level of transit usage is projected to increase by 29 percent between 2006 and 2035. The Westside project would extend the Metro Purple Line/Metro Red Line from its current western termini at Wilshire/Western Station and Hollywood/Highland Station to a new western terminus either in Westwood near the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), the West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital, or the City of Santa Monica. Alternatives considered in this draft EIS include a No Build Alternative, a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Alternative, five build alternatives with six options, and two minimum operable segments (MOS). The TSM Alternative would include more frequent bus service. The build alternatives would overlay heavy rail transit (HRT) on the rail and bus networks. Trains would operate in an exclusive grade-separated right-of-way, picking up electrical power from a third rail adjacent to and parallel with the running rail. The separated right-of-way would be all in a tunnel, with the top of the tunnel being a minimum 30 to 70 feet below the ground. No crossings of the right-of-way would be permitted in the same plane with HRT operations. HRT stations would be accessed from street-level entrances by stairs, escalators, and elevators that would bring patrons to a mezzanine level where ticketing functions would be located. In addition to the alternative termini for the proposed extension, alignment and station location options are considered and two MOS options are evaluated in the event of a decision to build the project in phases. Estimated capital costs of the build alternatives in 2009 dollars range from $4.04 billion to $8.75 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: HRT technology would allow very high passenger-carrying capacity of up to 1,000 passengers per train and maximum speed of 70 miles per hour. Implementation would reduce traffic congestion on roads, improve transit travel time, and provide more reliable transit service to the 286,246 transit riders who travel through the corridor today. Access to major activity and employment centers and transportation equity would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction impacts would include traffic and access disruptions near station sites, temporary sidewalk and bicycle lane closures, construction noise and emissions of nitrogen oxide and particulate matter, temporary removal of parking, visual effects, and haul trucks removing material excavated from the tunnel and station boxes. Each of the five build alternatives would displace one or more properties and could result in adverse effect on historic properties at the proposed Wilshire/Rodeo Station. Some business displacement would occur. The total number of jobs displaced would depend on which portal location is selected at each station. Multiple sections of the build alternatives would traverse the Santa Monica Fault and would be susceptible to possible surface fault rupture hazard. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100353, pages Draft EIS (Volume 1)--842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 SP - ages Draft EIS (Volume 1) EP - -842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132598?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=ages+Draft+EIS+%28Volume+1%29&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 36 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132316; 14624-2_0036 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 36 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132316?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 32 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132311; 14624-2_0032 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 32 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132311?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 29 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132291; 14624-2_0029 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 29 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132291?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 21 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132279; 14624-2_0021 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 21 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132279?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 20 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132269; 14624-2_0020 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 20 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132269?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 6 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132254; 14624-2_0006 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132254?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 19 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131860; 14624-2_0019 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 19 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131860?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 35 of 35] T2 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131829; 14625-3_0035 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Metro Purple Line and Metro Red Line heavy rail subway from its current westernmost termini toward west Los Angeles and Santa Monica, Los Angeles County, California is proposed. The Westside Subway Extension Transit Corridor Project results from nearly 30 years of planning and environmental review. The study area encompasses 38 square miles in western Los Angeles County and includes portions of five jurisdictions: the Cities of Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Currently, large population and employment centers are scattered throughout 15 existing major activity centers in the corridor. These activity centers are served by extremely congested road networks that will deteriorate further with the projected increase in population of 51,000 and the 58,000 additional jobs in the corridor by 2035. The current high level of transit usage is projected to increase by 29 percent between 2006 and 2035. The Westside project would extend the Metro Purple Line/Metro Red Line from its current western termini at Wilshire/Western Station and Hollywood/Highland Station to a new western terminus either in Westwood near the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), the West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital, or the City of Santa Monica. Alternatives considered in this draft EIS include a No Build Alternative, a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Alternative, five build alternatives with six options, and two minimum operable segments (MOS). The TSM Alternative would include more frequent bus service. The build alternatives would overlay heavy rail transit (HRT) on the rail and bus networks. Trains would operate in an exclusive grade-separated right-of-way, picking up electrical power from a third rail adjacent to and parallel with the running rail. The separated right-of-way would be all in a tunnel, with the top of the tunnel being a minimum 30 to 70 feet below the ground. No crossings of the right-of-way would be permitted in the same plane with HRT operations. HRT stations would be accessed from street-level entrances by stairs, escalators, and elevators that would bring patrons to a mezzanine level where ticketing functions would be located. In addition to the alternative termini for the proposed extension, alignment and station location options are considered and two MOS options are evaluated in the event of a decision to build the project in phases. Estimated capital costs of the build alternatives in 2009 dollars range from $4.04 billion to $8.75 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: HRT technology would allow very high passenger-carrying capacity of up to 1,000 passengers per train and maximum speed of 70 miles per hour. Implementation would reduce traffic congestion on roads, improve transit travel time, and provide more reliable transit service to the 286,246 transit riders who travel through the corridor today. Access to major activity and employment centers and transportation equity would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction impacts would include traffic and access disruptions near station sites, temporary sidewalk and bicycle lane closures, construction noise and emissions of nitrogen oxide and particulate matter, temporary removal of parking, visual effects, and haul trucks removing material excavated from the tunnel and station boxes. Each of the five build alternatives would displace one or more properties and could result in adverse effect on historic properties at the proposed Wilshire/Rodeo Station. Some business displacement would occur. The total number of jobs displaced would depend on which portal location is selected at each station. Multiple sections of the build alternatives would traverse the Santa Monica Fault and would be susceptible to possible surface fault rupture hazard. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100353, pages Draft EIS (Volume 1)--842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 SP - ages Draft EIS (Volume 1) EP - -842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27 VL - 35 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131829?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=ages+Draft+EIS+%28Volume+1%29&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 34 of 35] T2 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131821; 14625-3_0034 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Metro Purple Line and Metro Red Line heavy rail subway from its current westernmost termini toward west Los Angeles and Santa Monica, Los Angeles County, California is proposed. The Westside Subway Extension Transit Corridor Project results from nearly 30 years of planning and environmental review. The study area encompasses 38 square miles in western Los Angeles County and includes portions of five jurisdictions: the Cities of Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Currently, large population and employment centers are scattered throughout 15 existing major activity centers in the corridor. These activity centers are served by extremely congested road networks that will deteriorate further with the projected increase in population of 51,000 and the 58,000 additional jobs in the corridor by 2035. The current high level of transit usage is projected to increase by 29 percent between 2006 and 2035. The Westside project would extend the Metro Purple Line/Metro Red Line from its current western termini at Wilshire/Western Station and Hollywood/Highland Station to a new western terminus either in Westwood near the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), the West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital, or the City of Santa Monica. Alternatives considered in this draft EIS include a No Build Alternative, a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Alternative, five build alternatives with six options, and two minimum operable segments (MOS). The TSM Alternative would include more frequent bus service. The build alternatives would overlay heavy rail transit (HRT) on the rail and bus networks. Trains would operate in an exclusive grade-separated right-of-way, picking up electrical power from a third rail adjacent to and parallel with the running rail. The separated right-of-way would be all in a tunnel, with the top of the tunnel being a minimum 30 to 70 feet below the ground. No crossings of the right-of-way would be permitted in the same plane with HRT operations. HRT stations would be accessed from street-level entrances by stairs, escalators, and elevators that would bring patrons to a mezzanine level where ticketing functions would be located. In addition to the alternative termini for the proposed extension, alignment and station location options are considered and two MOS options are evaluated in the event of a decision to build the project in phases. Estimated capital costs of the build alternatives in 2009 dollars range from $4.04 billion to $8.75 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: HRT technology would allow very high passenger-carrying capacity of up to 1,000 passengers per train and maximum speed of 70 miles per hour. Implementation would reduce traffic congestion on roads, improve transit travel time, and provide more reliable transit service to the 286,246 transit riders who travel through the corridor today. Access to major activity and employment centers and transportation equity would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction impacts would include traffic and access disruptions near station sites, temporary sidewalk and bicycle lane closures, construction noise and emissions of nitrogen oxide and particulate matter, temporary removal of parking, visual effects, and haul trucks removing material excavated from the tunnel and station boxes. Each of the five build alternatives would displace one or more properties and could result in adverse effect on historic properties at the proposed Wilshire/Rodeo Station. Some business displacement would occur. The total number of jobs displaced would depend on which portal location is selected at each station. Multiple sections of the build alternatives would traverse the Santa Monica Fault and would be susceptible to possible surface fault rupture hazard. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100353, pages Draft EIS (Volume 1)--842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 SP - ages Draft EIS (Volume 1) EP - -842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27 VL - 34 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131821?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=ages+Draft+EIS+%28Volume+1%29&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 33 of 35] T2 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131815; 14625-3_0033 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Metro Purple Line and Metro Red Line heavy rail subway from its current westernmost termini toward west Los Angeles and Santa Monica, Los Angeles County, California is proposed. The Westside Subway Extension Transit Corridor Project results from nearly 30 years of planning and environmental review. The study area encompasses 38 square miles in western Los Angeles County and includes portions of five jurisdictions: the Cities of Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Currently, large population and employment centers are scattered throughout 15 existing major activity centers in the corridor. These activity centers are served by extremely congested road networks that will deteriorate further with the projected increase in population of 51,000 and the 58,000 additional jobs in the corridor by 2035. The current high level of transit usage is projected to increase by 29 percent between 2006 and 2035. The Westside project would extend the Metro Purple Line/Metro Red Line from its current western termini at Wilshire/Western Station and Hollywood/Highland Station to a new western terminus either in Westwood near the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), the West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital, or the City of Santa Monica. Alternatives considered in this draft EIS include a No Build Alternative, a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Alternative, five build alternatives with six options, and two minimum operable segments (MOS). The TSM Alternative would include more frequent bus service. The build alternatives would overlay heavy rail transit (HRT) on the rail and bus networks. Trains would operate in an exclusive grade-separated right-of-way, picking up electrical power from a third rail adjacent to and parallel with the running rail. The separated right-of-way would be all in a tunnel, with the top of the tunnel being a minimum 30 to 70 feet below the ground. No crossings of the right-of-way would be permitted in the same plane with HRT operations. HRT stations would be accessed from street-level entrances by stairs, escalators, and elevators that would bring patrons to a mezzanine level where ticketing functions would be located. In addition to the alternative termini for the proposed extension, alignment and station location options are considered and two MOS options are evaluated in the event of a decision to build the project in phases. Estimated capital costs of the build alternatives in 2009 dollars range from $4.04 billion to $8.75 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: HRT technology would allow very high passenger-carrying capacity of up to 1,000 passengers per train and maximum speed of 70 miles per hour. Implementation would reduce traffic congestion on roads, improve transit travel time, and provide more reliable transit service to the 286,246 transit riders who travel through the corridor today. Access to major activity and employment centers and transportation equity would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction impacts would include traffic and access disruptions near station sites, temporary sidewalk and bicycle lane closures, construction noise and emissions of nitrogen oxide and particulate matter, temporary removal of parking, visual effects, and haul trucks removing material excavated from the tunnel and station boxes. Each of the five build alternatives would displace one or more properties and could result in adverse effect on historic properties at the proposed Wilshire/Rodeo Station. Some business displacement would occur. The total number of jobs displaced would depend on which portal location is selected at each station. Multiple sections of the build alternatives would traverse the Santa Monica Fault and would be susceptible to possible surface fault rupture hazard. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100353, pages Draft EIS (Volume 1)--842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 SP - ages Draft EIS (Volume 1) EP - -842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27 VL - 33 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131815?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=ages+Draft+EIS+%28Volume+1%29&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 32 of 35] T2 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131809; 14625-3_0032 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Metro Purple Line and Metro Red Line heavy rail subway from its current westernmost termini toward west Los Angeles and Santa Monica, Los Angeles County, California is proposed. The Westside Subway Extension Transit Corridor Project results from nearly 30 years of planning and environmental review. The study area encompasses 38 square miles in western Los Angeles County and includes portions of five jurisdictions: the Cities of Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Currently, large population and employment centers are scattered throughout 15 existing major activity centers in the corridor. These activity centers are served by extremely congested road networks that will deteriorate further with the projected increase in population of 51,000 and the 58,000 additional jobs in the corridor by 2035. The current high level of transit usage is projected to increase by 29 percent between 2006 and 2035. The Westside project would extend the Metro Purple Line/Metro Red Line from its current western termini at Wilshire/Western Station and Hollywood/Highland Station to a new western terminus either in Westwood near the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), the West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital, or the City of Santa Monica. Alternatives considered in this draft EIS include a No Build Alternative, a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Alternative, five build alternatives with six options, and two minimum operable segments (MOS). The TSM Alternative would include more frequent bus service. The build alternatives would overlay heavy rail transit (HRT) on the rail and bus networks. Trains would operate in an exclusive grade-separated right-of-way, picking up electrical power from a third rail adjacent to and parallel with the running rail. The separated right-of-way would be all in a tunnel, with the top of the tunnel being a minimum 30 to 70 feet below the ground. No crossings of the right-of-way would be permitted in the same plane with HRT operations. HRT stations would be accessed from street-level entrances by stairs, escalators, and elevators that would bring patrons to a mezzanine level where ticketing functions would be located. In addition to the alternative termini for the proposed extension, alignment and station location options are considered and two MOS options are evaluated in the event of a decision to build the project in phases. Estimated capital costs of the build alternatives in 2009 dollars range from $4.04 billion to $8.75 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: HRT technology would allow very high passenger-carrying capacity of up to 1,000 passengers per train and maximum speed of 70 miles per hour. Implementation would reduce traffic congestion on roads, improve transit travel time, and provide more reliable transit service to the 286,246 transit riders who travel through the corridor today. Access to major activity and employment centers and transportation equity would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction impacts would include traffic and access disruptions near station sites, temporary sidewalk and bicycle lane closures, construction noise and emissions of nitrogen oxide and particulate matter, temporary removal of parking, visual effects, and haul trucks removing material excavated from the tunnel and station boxes. Each of the five build alternatives would displace one or more properties and could result in adverse effect on historic properties at the proposed Wilshire/Rodeo Station. Some business displacement would occur. The total number of jobs displaced would depend on which portal location is selected at each station. Multiple sections of the build alternatives would traverse the Santa Monica Fault and would be susceptible to possible surface fault rupture hazard. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100353, pages Draft EIS (Volume 1)--842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 SP - ages Draft EIS (Volume 1) EP - -842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27 VL - 32 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131809?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=ages+Draft+EIS+%28Volume+1%29&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 41 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131235; 14624-2_0041 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 41 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131235?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STEHEKIN RIVER CORRIDOR IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, LAKE CHELAN NATIONAL RECREATION AREA, NORTH CASCADES NATIONAL PARK SERVICE COMPLEX, WASHINGTON. [Part 3 of 3] T2 - STEHEKIN RIVER CORRIDOR IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, LAKE CHELAN NATIONAL RECREATION AREA, NORTH CASCADES NATIONAL PARK SERVICE COMPLEX, WASHINGTON. AN - 873130022; 14628-6_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of management actions to respond to the increased magnitude and frequency of flooding in the Stehekin River corridor within Lake Chelan National Recreation Area (NRA), North Cascades National Park Service Complex, Washington is proposed. The project area includes the lower Stehekin Valley, from High Bridge to the head of Lake Chelan, including Weaver Point. Land ownership includes a patchwork of public land and 460 acres of private lands. Recent major floods and resultant channel changes on the lower Stehekin River have intensified flood and erosion threats to National Park Service (NPS) facilities and are impacting natural resources within Lake Chelan NRA. The three largest recorded floods on the Stehekin River since 1911 have occurred within the past 15 years, and in response, the NPS has spent more than $3 million to protect public roads and facilities and to repair flood damage. Roads, visitor facilities, and private development once thought to be safe from the river are now threatened. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative 1), which would perpetuate current management practices, are considered in this draft EIS. Actions called for by the 1995 Lake Chelan NRA General Management Plan that would be implemented under all alternatives include replacement and relocation/construction of the NPS maintenance compound; replacement and relocation/construction of administrative housing in the same area; creation of a Lower Valley Trail that connects Stehekin Landing to High Bridge; and the ongoing use of willing seller-willing buyer land acquisition and exchange to remove development from the Stehekin River floodplain. The Company Creek Road would be maintained in its existing alignment and existing erosion protection measures along the Stehekin Valley and Company Creek roads would be maintained, including the 400-foot-long levee constructed in the 1980s. Alternative 2, which is the preferred alternative, would include more high-priority land acquisition in the channel migration zone, rerouting the Stehekin Valley Road out of the floodplain/channel migration zone around McGregor Meadows and the Lower Field, identification of new land protection priorities through the revised Land Protection Plan, designation of new campgrounds and a new raft takeout, closure of the shooting range, and implementation of erosion protection measures at three sites. Alternative 3 would include the same land acquisition as in Alternative 2 and would reroute the Stehekin Valley Road around McGregor Meadows. New campgrounds would be designated and erosion protection measures would be implemented at five erosion protection sites. Alternative 4 would maintain the alignment of the Stehekin Valley Road, including raising it through McGregor Meadows. New land protection priorities would be less than under Alternative 2. New campgrounds and a new raft takeout would be designated and erosion protection measures would be implemented at seven sites. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would help the NPS to sustainably operate and maintain administrative facilities, public access roads, trails, and campgrounds; protect water quality, scenic values, habitat, and natural processes of the Stehekin River; and continue visitor services, including those services and facilities found on private lands. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: All of the action alternatives would add to cumulative effects on the Stehekin River by installation of new erosion protection structures. Alternatives 2 and 3 would create short- and long-term disturbances to land use, vegetation and soils, water quality, and wildlife during construction of the new road around McGregor Meadows and NPS facilities. The reroute could disturb a nesting site for northern spotted owls. Management of large wood and proliferation of bank protection measures have the potential to increase the spread of nonnative plants. LEGAL MANDATES: National Park Service Organic Act of 1916 (16 U.S.C. 1 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100356, Draft EIS--628 pages, Draft Land Protection Plan--72 pages, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Parks, Refuges and Forests KW - Bank Protection KW - Dikes KW - Erosion KW - Erosion Control KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Hazards KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Land Management KW - National Parks KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources KW - Rivers KW - Roads KW - Trails KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Lake Chelan National Recreation Area KW - North Cascades National Park KW - Stehekin River KW - Washington KW - National Park Service Organic Act of 1916, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130022?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=STEHEKIN+RIVER+CORRIDOR+IMPLEMENTATION+PLAN%2C+LAKE+CHELAN+NATIONAL+RECREATION+AREA%2C+NORTH+CASCADES+NATIONAL+PARK+SERVICE+COMPLEX%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=STEHEKIN+RIVER+CORRIDOR+IMPLEMENTATION+PLAN%2C+LAKE+CHELAN+NATIONAL+RECREATION+AREA%2C+NORTH+CASCADES+NATIONAL+PARK+SERVICE+COMPLEX%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Sedro-Woolley, Washington; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 31 of 35] T2 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873129985; 14625-3_0031 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Metro Purple Line and Metro Red Line heavy rail subway from its current westernmost termini toward west Los Angeles and Santa Monica, Los Angeles County, California is proposed. The Westside Subway Extension Transit Corridor Project results from nearly 30 years of planning and environmental review. The study area encompasses 38 square miles in western Los Angeles County and includes portions of five jurisdictions: the Cities of Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Currently, large population and employment centers are scattered throughout 15 existing major activity centers in the corridor. These activity centers are served by extremely congested road networks that will deteriorate further with the projected increase in population of 51,000 and the 58,000 additional jobs in the corridor by 2035. The current high level of transit usage is projected to increase by 29 percent between 2006 and 2035. The Westside project would extend the Metro Purple Line/Metro Red Line from its current western termini at Wilshire/Western Station and Hollywood/Highland Station to a new western terminus either in Westwood near the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), the West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital, or the City of Santa Monica. Alternatives considered in this draft EIS include a No Build Alternative, a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Alternative, five build alternatives with six options, and two minimum operable segments (MOS). The TSM Alternative would include more frequent bus service. The build alternatives would overlay heavy rail transit (HRT) on the rail and bus networks. Trains would operate in an exclusive grade-separated right-of-way, picking up electrical power from a third rail adjacent to and parallel with the running rail. The separated right-of-way would be all in a tunnel, with the top of the tunnel being a minimum 30 to 70 feet below the ground. No crossings of the right-of-way would be permitted in the same plane with HRT operations. HRT stations would be accessed from street-level entrances by stairs, escalators, and elevators that would bring patrons to a mezzanine level where ticketing functions would be located. In addition to the alternative termini for the proposed extension, alignment and station location options are considered and two MOS options are evaluated in the event of a decision to build the project in phases. Estimated capital costs of the build alternatives in 2009 dollars range from $4.04 billion to $8.75 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: HRT technology would allow very high passenger-carrying capacity of up to 1,000 passengers per train and maximum speed of 70 miles per hour. Implementation would reduce traffic congestion on roads, improve transit travel time, and provide more reliable transit service to the 286,246 transit riders who travel through the corridor today. Access to major activity and employment centers and transportation equity would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction impacts would include traffic and access disruptions near station sites, temporary sidewalk and bicycle lane closures, construction noise and emissions of nitrogen oxide and particulate matter, temporary removal of parking, visual effects, and haul trucks removing material excavated from the tunnel and station boxes. Each of the five build alternatives would displace one or more properties and could result in adverse effect on historic properties at the proposed Wilshire/Rodeo Station. Some business displacement would occur. The total number of jobs displaced would depend on which portal location is selected at each station. Multiple sections of the build alternatives would traverse the Santa Monica Fault and would be susceptible to possible surface fault rupture hazard. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100353, pages Draft EIS (Volume 1)--842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 SP - ages Draft EIS (Volume 1) EP - -842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27 VL - 31 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129985?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=ages+Draft+EIS+%28Volume+1%29&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 30 of 35] T2 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873129970; 14625-3_0030 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Metro Purple Line and Metro Red Line heavy rail subway from its current westernmost termini toward west Los Angeles and Santa Monica, Los Angeles County, California is proposed. The Westside Subway Extension Transit Corridor Project results from nearly 30 years of planning and environmental review. The study area encompasses 38 square miles in western Los Angeles County and includes portions of five jurisdictions: the Cities of Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Currently, large population and employment centers are scattered throughout 15 existing major activity centers in the corridor. These activity centers are served by extremely congested road networks that will deteriorate further with the projected increase in population of 51,000 and the 58,000 additional jobs in the corridor by 2035. The current high level of transit usage is projected to increase by 29 percent between 2006 and 2035. The Westside project would extend the Metro Purple Line/Metro Red Line from its current western termini at Wilshire/Western Station and Hollywood/Highland Station to a new western terminus either in Westwood near the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), the West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital, or the City of Santa Monica. Alternatives considered in this draft EIS include a No Build Alternative, a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Alternative, five build alternatives with six options, and two minimum operable segments (MOS). The TSM Alternative would include more frequent bus service. The build alternatives would overlay heavy rail transit (HRT) on the rail and bus networks. Trains would operate in an exclusive grade-separated right-of-way, picking up electrical power from a third rail adjacent to and parallel with the running rail. The separated right-of-way would be all in a tunnel, with the top of the tunnel being a minimum 30 to 70 feet below the ground. No crossings of the right-of-way would be permitted in the same plane with HRT operations. HRT stations would be accessed from street-level entrances by stairs, escalators, and elevators that would bring patrons to a mezzanine level where ticketing functions would be located. In addition to the alternative termini for the proposed extension, alignment and station location options are considered and two MOS options are evaluated in the event of a decision to build the project in phases. Estimated capital costs of the build alternatives in 2009 dollars range from $4.04 billion to $8.75 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: HRT technology would allow very high passenger-carrying capacity of up to 1,000 passengers per train and maximum speed of 70 miles per hour. Implementation would reduce traffic congestion on roads, improve transit travel time, and provide more reliable transit service to the 286,246 transit riders who travel through the corridor today. Access to major activity and employment centers and transportation equity would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction impacts would include traffic and access disruptions near station sites, temporary sidewalk and bicycle lane closures, construction noise and emissions of nitrogen oxide and particulate matter, temporary removal of parking, visual effects, and haul trucks removing material excavated from the tunnel and station boxes. Each of the five build alternatives would displace one or more properties and could result in adverse effect on historic properties at the proposed Wilshire/Rodeo Station. Some business displacement would occur. The total number of jobs displaced would depend on which portal location is selected at each station. Multiple sections of the build alternatives would traverse the Santa Monica Fault and would be susceptible to possible surface fault rupture hazard. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100353, pages Draft EIS (Volume 1)--842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 SP - ages Draft EIS (Volume 1) EP - -842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27 VL - 30 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129970?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=ages+Draft+EIS+%28Volume+1%29&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 29 of 35] T2 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873129958; 14625-3_0029 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Metro Purple Line and Metro Red Line heavy rail subway from its current westernmost termini toward west Los Angeles and Santa Monica, Los Angeles County, California is proposed. The Westside Subway Extension Transit Corridor Project results from nearly 30 years of planning and environmental review. The study area encompasses 38 square miles in western Los Angeles County and includes portions of five jurisdictions: the Cities of Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Currently, large population and employment centers are scattered throughout 15 existing major activity centers in the corridor. These activity centers are served by extremely congested road networks that will deteriorate further with the projected increase in population of 51,000 and the 58,000 additional jobs in the corridor by 2035. The current high level of transit usage is projected to increase by 29 percent between 2006 and 2035. The Westside project would extend the Metro Purple Line/Metro Red Line from its current western termini at Wilshire/Western Station and Hollywood/Highland Station to a new western terminus either in Westwood near the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), the West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital, or the City of Santa Monica. Alternatives considered in this draft EIS include a No Build Alternative, a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Alternative, five build alternatives with six options, and two minimum operable segments (MOS). The TSM Alternative would include more frequent bus service. The build alternatives would overlay heavy rail transit (HRT) on the rail and bus networks. Trains would operate in an exclusive grade-separated right-of-way, picking up electrical power from a third rail adjacent to and parallel with the running rail. The separated right-of-way would be all in a tunnel, with the top of the tunnel being a minimum 30 to 70 feet below the ground. No crossings of the right-of-way would be permitted in the same plane with HRT operations. HRT stations would be accessed from street-level entrances by stairs, escalators, and elevators that would bring patrons to a mezzanine level where ticketing functions would be located. In addition to the alternative termini for the proposed extension, alignment and station location options are considered and two MOS options are evaluated in the event of a decision to build the project in phases. Estimated capital costs of the build alternatives in 2009 dollars range from $4.04 billion to $8.75 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: HRT technology would allow very high passenger-carrying capacity of up to 1,000 passengers per train and maximum speed of 70 miles per hour. Implementation would reduce traffic congestion on roads, improve transit travel time, and provide more reliable transit service to the 286,246 transit riders who travel through the corridor today. Access to major activity and employment centers and transportation equity would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction impacts would include traffic and access disruptions near station sites, temporary sidewalk and bicycle lane closures, construction noise and emissions of nitrogen oxide and particulate matter, temporary removal of parking, visual effects, and haul trucks removing material excavated from the tunnel and station boxes. Each of the five build alternatives would displace one or more properties and could result in adverse effect on historic properties at the proposed Wilshire/Rodeo Station. Some business displacement would occur. The total number of jobs displaced would depend on which portal location is selected at each station. Multiple sections of the build alternatives would traverse the Santa Monica Fault and would be susceptible to possible surface fault rupture hazard. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100353, pages Draft EIS (Volume 1)--842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 SP - ages Draft EIS (Volume 1) EP - -842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27 VL - 29 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129958?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=ages+Draft+EIS+%28Volume+1%29&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 28 of 35] T2 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873129943; 14625-3_0028 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Metro Purple Line and Metro Red Line heavy rail subway from its current westernmost termini toward west Los Angeles and Santa Monica, Los Angeles County, California is proposed. The Westside Subway Extension Transit Corridor Project results from nearly 30 years of planning and environmental review. The study area encompasses 38 square miles in western Los Angeles County and includes portions of five jurisdictions: the Cities of Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Currently, large population and employment centers are scattered throughout 15 existing major activity centers in the corridor. These activity centers are served by extremely congested road networks that will deteriorate further with the projected increase in population of 51,000 and the 58,000 additional jobs in the corridor by 2035. The current high level of transit usage is projected to increase by 29 percent between 2006 and 2035. The Westside project would extend the Metro Purple Line/Metro Red Line from its current western termini at Wilshire/Western Station and Hollywood/Highland Station to a new western terminus either in Westwood near the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), the West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital, or the City of Santa Monica. Alternatives considered in this draft EIS include a No Build Alternative, a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Alternative, five build alternatives with six options, and two minimum operable segments (MOS). The TSM Alternative would include more frequent bus service. The build alternatives would overlay heavy rail transit (HRT) on the rail and bus networks. Trains would operate in an exclusive grade-separated right-of-way, picking up electrical power from a third rail adjacent to and parallel with the running rail. The separated right-of-way would be all in a tunnel, with the top of the tunnel being a minimum 30 to 70 feet below the ground. No crossings of the right-of-way would be permitted in the same plane with HRT operations. HRT stations would be accessed from street-level entrances by stairs, escalators, and elevators that would bring patrons to a mezzanine level where ticketing functions would be located. In addition to the alternative termini for the proposed extension, alignment and station location options are considered and two MOS options are evaluated in the event of a decision to build the project in phases. Estimated capital costs of the build alternatives in 2009 dollars range from $4.04 billion to $8.75 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: HRT technology would allow very high passenger-carrying capacity of up to 1,000 passengers per train and maximum speed of 70 miles per hour. Implementation would reduce traffic congestion on roads, improve transit travel time, and provide more reliable transit service to the 286,246 transit riders who travel through the corridor today. Access to major activity and employment centers and transportation equity would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction impacts would include traffic and access disruptions near station sites, temporary sidewalk and bicycle lane closures, construction noise and emissions of nitrogen oxide and particulate matter, temporary removal of parking, visual effects, and haul trucks removing material excavated from the tunnel and station boxes. Each of the five build alternatives would displace one or more properties and could result in adverse effect on historic properties at the proposed Wilshire/Rodeo Station. Some business displacement would occur. The total number of jobs displaced would depend on which portal location is selected at each station. Multiple sections of the build alternatives would traverse the Santa Monica Fault and would be susceptible to possible surface fault rupture hazard. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100353, pages Draft EIS (Volume 1)--842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 SP - ages Draft EIS (Volume 1) EP - -842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27 VL - 28 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129943?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=ages+Draft+EIS+%28Volume+1%29&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 27 of 35] T2 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873129932; 14625-3_0027 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Metro Purple Line and Metro Red Line heavy rail subway from its current westernmost termini toward west Los Angeles and Santa Monica, Los Angeles County, California is proposed. The Westside Subway Extension Transit Corridor Project results from nearly 30 years of planning and environmental review. The study area encompasses 38 square miles in western Los Angeles County and includes portions of five jurisdictions: the Cities of Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Currently, large population and employment centers are scattered throughout 15 existing major activity centers in the corridor. These activity centers are served by extremely congested road networks that will deteriorate further with the projected increase in population of 51,000 and the 58,000 additional jobs in the corridor by 2035. The current high level of transit usage is projected to increase by 29 percent between 2006 and 2035. The Westside project would extend the Metro Purple Line/Metro Red Line from its current western termini at Wilshire/Western Station and Hollywood/Highland Station to a new western terminus either in Westwood near the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), the West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital, or the City of Santa Monica. Alternatives considered in this draft EIS include a No Build Alternative, a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Alternative, five build alternatives with six options, and two minimum operable segments (MOS). The TSM Alternative would include more frequent bus service. The build alternatives would overlay heavy rail transit (HRT) on the rail and bus networks. Trains would operate in an exclusive grade-separated right-of-way, picking up electrical power from a third rail adjacent to and parallel with the running rail. The separated right-of-way would be all in a tunnel, with the top of the tunnel being a minimum 30 to 70 feet below the ground. No crossings of the right-of-way would be permitted in the same plane with HRT operations. HRT stations would be accessed from street-level entrances by stairs, escalators, and elevators that would bring patrons to a mezzanine level where ticketing functions would be located. In addition to the alternative termini for the proposed extension, alignment and station location options are considered and two MOS options are evaluated in the event of a decision to build the project in phases. Estimated capital costs of the build alternatives in 2009 dollars range from $4.04 billion to $8.75 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: HRT technology would allow very high passenger-carrying capacity of up to 1,000 passengers per train and maximum speed of 70 miles per hour. Implementation would reduce traffic congestion on roads, improve transit travel time, and provide more reliable transit service to the 286,246 transit riders who travel through the corridor today. Access to major activity and employment centers and transportation equity would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction impacts would include traffic and access disruptions near station sites, temporary sidewalk and bicycle lane closures, construction noise and emissions of nitrogen oxide and particulate matter, temporary removal of parking, visual effects, and haul trucks removing material excavated from the tunnel and station boxes. Each of the five build alternatives would displace one or more properties and could result in adverse effect on historic properties at the proposed Wilshire/Rodeo Station. Some business displacement would occur. The total number of jobs displaced would depend on which portal location is selected at each station. Multiple sections of the build alternatives would traverse the Santa Monica Fault and would be susceptible to possible surface fault rupture hazard. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100353, pages Draft EIS (Volume 1)--842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 SP - ages Draft EIS (Volume 1) EP - -842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27 VL - 27 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129932?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=ages+Draft+EIS+%28Volume+1%29&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 26 of 35] T2 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873129921; 14625-3_0026 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Metro Purple Line and Metro Red Line heavy rail subway from its current westernmost termini toward west Los Angeles and Santa Monica, Los Angeles County, California is proposed. The Westside Subway Extension Transit Corridor Project results from nearly 30 years of planning and environmental review. The study area encompasses 38 square miles in western Los Angeles County and includes portions of five jurisdictions: the Cities of Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Currently, large population and employment centers are scattered throughout 15 existing major activity centers in the corridor. These activity centers are served by extremely congested road networks that will deteriorate further with the projected increase in population of 51,000 and the 58,000 additional jobs in the corridor by 2035. The current high level of transit usage is projected to increase by 29 percent between 2006 and 2035. The Westside project would extend the Metro Purple Line/Metro Red Line from its current western termini at Wilshire/Western Station and Hollywood/Highland Station to a new western terminus either in Westwood near the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), the West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital, or the City of Santa Monica. Alternatives considered in this draft EIS include a No Build Alternative, a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Alternative, five build alternatives with six options, and two minimum operable segments (MOS). The TSM Alternative would include more frequent bus service. The build alternatives would overlay heavy rail transit (HRT) on the rail and bus networks. Trains would operate in an exclusive grade-separated right-of-way, picking up electrical power from a third rail adjacent to and parallel with the running rail. The separated right-of-way would be all in a tunnel, with the top of the tunnel being a minimum 30 to 70 feet below the ground. No crossings of the right-of-way would be permitted in the same plane with HRT operations. HRT stations would be accessed from street-level entrances by stairs, escalators, and elevators that would bring patrons to a mezzanine level where ticketing functions would be located. In addition to the alternative termini for the proposed extension, alignment and station location options are considered and two MOS options are evaluated in the event of a decision to build the project in phases. Estimated capital costs of the build alternatives in 2009 dollars range from $4.04 billion to $8.75 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: HRT technology would allow very high passenger-carrying capacity of up to 1,000 passengers per train and maximum speed of 70 miles per hour. Implementation would reduce traffic congestion on roads, improve transit travel time, and provide more reliable transit service to the 286,246 transit riders who travel through the corridor today. Access to major activity and employment centers and transportation equity would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction impacts would include traffic and access disruptions near station sites, temporary sidewalk and bicycle lane closures, construction noise and emissions of nitrogen oxide and particulate matter, temporary removal of parking, visual effects, and haul trucks removing material excavated from the tunnel and station boxes. Each of the five build alternatives would displace one or more properties and could result in adverse effect on historic properties at the proposed Wilshire/Rodeo Station. Some business displacement would occur. The total number of jobs displaced would depend on which portal location is selected at each station. Multiple sections of the build alternatives would traverse the Santa Monica Fault and would be susceptible to possible surface fault rupture hazard. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100353, pages Draft EIS (Volume 1)--842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 SP - ages Draft EIS (Volume 1) EP - -842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27 VL - 26 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129921?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=ages+Draft+EIS+%28Volume+1%29&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 25 of 35] T2 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873129897; 14625-3_0025 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Metro Purple Line and Metro Red Line heavy rail subway from its current westernmost termini toward west Los Angeles and Santa Monica, Los Angeles County, California is proposed. The Westside Subway Extension Transit Corridor Project results from nearly 30 years of planning and environmental review. The study area encompasses 38 square miles in western Los Angeles County and includes portions of five jurisdictions: the Cities of Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Currently, large population and employment centers are scattered throughout 15 existing major activity centers in the corridor. These activity centers are served by extremely congested road networks that will deteriorate further with the projected increase in population of 51,000 and the 58,000 additional jobs in the corridor by 2035. The current high level of transit usage is projected to increase by 29 percent between 2006 and 2035. The Westside project would extend the Metro Purple Line/Metro Red Line from its current western termini at Wilshire/Western Station and Hollywood/Highland Station to a new western terminus either in Westwood near the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), the West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital, or the City of Santa Monica. Alternatives considered in this draft EIS include a No Build Alternative, a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Alternative, five build alternatives with six options, and two minimum operable segments (MOS). The TSM Alternative would include more frequent bus service. The build alternatives would overlay heavy rail transit (HRT) on the rail and bus networks. Trains would operate in an exclusive grade-separated right-of-way, picking up electrical power from a third rail adjacent to and parallel with the running rail. The separated right-of-way would be all in a tunnel, with the top of the tunnel being a minimum 30 to 70 feet below the ground. No crossings of the right-of-way would be permitted in the same plane with HRT operations. HRT stations would be accessed from street-level entrances by stairs, escalators, and elevators that would bring patrons to a mezzanine level where ticketing functions would be located. In addition to the alternative termini for the proposed extension, alignment and station location options are considered and two MOS options are evaluated in the event of a decision to build the project in phases. Estimated capital costs of the build alternatives in 2009 dollars range from $4.04 billion to $8.75 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: HRT technology would allow very high passenger-carrying capacity of up to 1,000 passengers per train and maximum speed of 70 miles per hour. Implementation would reduce traffic congestion on roads, improve transit travel time, and provide more reliable transit service to the 286,246 transit riders who travel through the corridor today. Access to major activity and employment centers and transportation equity would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction impacts would include traffic and access disruptions near station sites, temporary sidewalk and bicycle lane closures, construction noise and emissions of nitrogen oxide and particulate matter, temporary removal of parking, visual effects, and haul trucks removing material excavated from the tunnel and station boxes. Each of the five build alternatives would displace one or more properties and could result in adverse effect on historic properties at the proposed Wilshire/Rodeo Station. Some business displacement would occur. The total number of jobs displaced would depend on which portal location is selected at each station. Multiple sections of the build alternatives would traverse the Santa Monica Fault and would be susceptible to possible surface fault rupture hazard. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100353, pages Draft EIS (Volume 1)--842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 SP - ages Draft EIS (Volume 1) EP - -842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27 VL - 25 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129897?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=ages+Draft+EIS+%28Volume+1%29&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 5 of 35] T2 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873129807; 14625-3_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Metro Purple Line and Metro Red Line heavy rail subway from its current westernmost termini toward west Los Angeles and Santa Monica, Los Angeles County, California is proposed. The Westside Subway Extension Transit Corridor Project results from nearly 30 years of planning and environmental review. The study area encompasses 38 square miles in western Los Angeles County and includes portions of five jurisdictions: the Cities of Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Currently, large population and employment centers are scattered throughout 15 existing major activity centers in the corridor. These activity centers are served by extremely congested road networks that will deteriorate further with the projected increase in population of 51,000 and the 58,000 additional jobs in the corridor by 2035. The current high level of transit usage is projected to increase by 29 percent between 2006 and 2035. The Westside project would extend the Metro Purple Line/Metro Red Line from its current western termini at Wilshire/Western Station and Hollywood/Highland Station to a new western terminus either in Westwood near the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), the West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital, or the City of Santa Monica. Alternatives considered in this draft EIS include a No Build Alternative, a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Alternative, five build alternatives with six options, and two minimum operable segments (MOS). The TSM Alternative would include more frequent bus service. The build alternatives would overlay heavy rail transit (HRT) on the rail and bus networks. Trains would operate in an exclusive grade-separated right-of-way, picking up electrical power from a third rail adjacent to and parallel with the running rail. The separated right-of-way would be all in a tunnel, with the top of the tunnel being a minimum 30 to 70 feet below the ground. No crossings of the right-of-way would be permitted in the same plane with HRT operations. HRT stations would be accessed from street-level entrances by stairs, escalators, and elevators that would bring patrons to a mezzanine level where ticketing functions would be located. In addition to the alternative termini for the proposed extension, alignment and station location options are considered and two MOS options are evaluated in the event of a decision to build the project in phases. Estimated capital costs of the build alternatives in 2009 dollars range from $4.04 billion to $8.75 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: HRT technology would allow very high passenger-carrying capacity of up to 1,000 passengers per train and maximum speed of 70 miles per hour. Implementation would reduce traffic congestion on roads, improve transit travel time, and provide more reliable transit service to the 286,246 transit riders who travel through the corridor today. Access to major activity and employment centers and transportation equity would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction impacts would include traffic and access disruptions near station sites, temporary sidewalk and bicycle lane closures, construction noise and emissions of nitrogen oxide and particulate matter, temporary removal of parking, visual effects, and haul trucks removing material excavated from the tunnel and station boxes. Each of the five build alternatives would displace one or more properties and could result in adverse effect on historic properties at the proposed Wilshire/Rodeo Station. Some business displacement would occur. The total number of jobs displaced would depend on which portal location is selected at each station. Multiple sections of the build alternatives would traverse the Santa Monica Fault and would be susceptible to possible surface fault rupture hazard. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100353, pages Draft EIS (Volume 1)--842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 SP - ages Draft EIS (Volume 1) EP - -842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129807?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=ages+Draft+EIS+%28Volume+1%29&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 4 of 35] T2 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873129793; 14625-3_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Metro Purple Line and Metro Red Line heavy rail subway from its current westernmost termini toward west Los Angeles and Santa Monica, Los Angeles County, California is proposed. The Westside Subway Extension Transit Corridor Project results from nearly 30 years of planning and environmental review. The study area encompasses 38 square miles in western Los Angeles County and includes portions of five jurisdictions: the Cities of Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Currently, large population and employment centers are scattered throughout 15 existing major activity centers in the corridor. These activity centers are served by extremely congested road networks that will deteriorate further with the projected increase in population of 51,000 and the 58,000 additional jobs in the corridor by 2035. The current high level of transit usage is projected to increase by 29 percent between 2006 and 2035. The Westside project would extend the Metro Purple Line/Metro Red Line from its current western termini at Wilshire/Western Station and Hollywood/Highland Station to a new western terminus either in Westwood near the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), the West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital, or the City of Santa Monica. Alternatives considered in this draft EIS include a No Build Alternative, a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Alternative, five build alternatives with six options, and two minimum operable segments (MOS). The TSM Alternative would include more frequent bus service. The build alternatives would overlay heavy rail transit (HRT) on the rail and bus networks. Trains would operate in an exclusive grade-separated right-of-way, picking up electrical power from a third rail adjacent to and parallel with the running rail. The separated right-of-way would be all in a tunnel, with the top of the tunnel being a minimum 30 to 70 feet below the ground. No crossings of the right-of-way would be permitted in the same plane with HRT operations. HRT stations would be accessed from street-level entrances by stairs, escalators, and elevators that would bring patrons to a mezzanine level where ticketing functions would be located. In addition to the alternative termini for the proposed extension, alignment and station location options are considered and two MOS options are evaluated in the event of a decision to build the project in phases. Estimated capital costs of the build alternatives in 2009 dollars range from $4.04 billion to $8.75 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: HRT technology would allow very high passenger-carrying capacity of up to 1,000 passengers per train and maximum speed of 70 miles per hour. Implementation would reduce traffic congestion on roads, improve transit travel time, and provide more reliable transit service to the 286,246 transit riders who travel through the corridor today. Access to major activity and employment centers and transportation equity would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction impacts would include traffic and access disruptions near station sites, temporary sidewalk and bicycle lane closures, construction noise and emissions of nitrogen oxide and particulate matter, temporary removal of parking, visual effects, and haul trucks removing material excavated from the tunnel and station boxes. Each of the five build alternatives would displace one or more properties and could result in adverse effect on historic properties at the proposed Wilshire/Rodeo Station. Some business displacement would occur. The total number of jobs displaced would depend on which portal location is selected at each station. Multiple sections of the build alternatives would traverse the Santa Monica Fault and would be susceptible to possible surface fault rupture hazard. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100353, pages Draft EIS (Volume 1)--842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 SP - ages Draft EIS (Volume 1) EP - -842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129793?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=ages+Draft+EIS+%28Volume+1%29&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 3 of 35] T2 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873129778; 14625-3_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Metro Purple Line and Metro Red Line heavy rail subway from its current westernmost termini toward west Los Angeles and Santa Monica, Los Angeles County, California is proposed. The Westside Subway Extension Transit Corridor Project results from nearly 30 years of planning and environmental review. The study area encompasses 38 square miles in western Los Angeles County and includes portions of five jurisdictions: the Cities of Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Currently, large population and employment centers are scattered throughout 15 existing major activity centers in the corridor. These activity centers are served by extremely congested road networks that will deteriorate further with the projected increase in population of 51,000 and the 58,000 additional jobs in the corridor by 2035. The current high level of transit usage is projected to increase by 29 percent between 2006 and 2035. The Westside project would extend the Metro Purple Line/Metro Red Line from its current western termini at Wilshire/Western Station and Hollywood/Highland Station to a new western terminus either in Westwood near the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), the West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital, or the City of Santa Monica. Alternatives considered in this draft EIS include a No Build Alternative, a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Alternative, five build alternatives with six options, and two minimum operable segments (MOS). The TSM Alternative would include more frequent bus service. The build alternatives would overlay heavy rail transit (HRT) on the rail and bus networks. Trains would operate in an exclusive grade-separated right-of-way, picking up electrical power from a third rail adjacent to and parallel with the running rail. The separated right-of-way would be all in a tunnel, with the top of the tunnel being a minimum 30 to 70 feet below the ground. No crossings of the right-of-way would be permitted in the same plane with HRT operations. HRT stations would be accessed from street-level entrances by stairs, escalators, and elevators that would bring patrons to a mezzanine level where ticketing functions would be located. In addition to the alternative termini for the proposed extension, alignment and station location options are considered and two MOS options are evaluated in the event of a decision to build the project in phases. Estimated capital costs of the build alternatives in 2009 dollars range from $4.04 billion to $8.75 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: HRT technology would allow very high passenger-carrying capacity of up to 1,000 passengers per train and maximum speed of 70 miles per hour. Implementation would reduce traffic congestion on roads, improve transit travel time, and provide more reliable transit service to the 286,246 transit riders who travel through the corridor today. Access to major activity and employment centers and transportation equity would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction impacts would include traffic and access disruptions near station sites, temporary sidewalk and bicycle lane closures, construction noise and emissions of nitrogen oxide and particulate matter, temporary removal of parking, visual effects, and haul trucks removing material excavated from the tunnel and station boxes. Each of the five build alternatives would displace one or more properties and could result in adverse effect on historic properties at the proposed Wilshire/Rodeo Station. Some business displacement would occur. The total number of jobs displaced would depend on which portal location is selected at each station. Multiple sections of the build alternatives would traverse the Santa Monica Fault and would be susceptible to possible surface fault rupture hazard. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100353, pages Draft EIS (Volume 1)--842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 SP - ages Draft EIS (Volume 1) EP - -842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129778?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=ages+Draft+EIS+%28Volume+1%29&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 2 of 35] T2 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873129760; 14625-3_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Metro Purple Line and Metro Red Line heavy rail subway from its current westernmost termini toward west Los Angeles and Santa Monica, Los Angeles County, California is proposed. The Westside Subway Extension Transit Corridor Project results from nearly 30 years of planning and environmental review. The study area encompasses 38 square miles in western Los Angeles County and includes portions of five jurisdictions: the Cities of Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Currently, large population and employment centers are scattered throughout 15 existing major activity centers in the corridor. These activity centers are served by extremely congested road networks that will deteriorate further with the projected increase in population of 51,000 and the 58,000 additional jobs in the corridor by 2035. The current high level of transit usage is projected to increase by 29 percent between 2006 and 2035. The Westside project would extend the Metro Purple Line/Metro Red Line from its current western termini at Wilshire/Western Station and Hollywood/Highland Station to a new western terminus either in Westwood near the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), the West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital, or the City of Santa Monica. Alternatives considered in this draft EIS include a No Build Alternative, a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Alternative, five build alternatives with six options, and two minimum operable segments (MOS). The TSM Alternative would include more frequent bus service. The build alternatives would overlay heavy rail transit (HRT) on the rail and bus networks. Trains would operate in an exclusive grade-separated right-of-way, picking up electrical power from a third rail adjacent to and parallel with the running rail. The separated right-of-way would be all in a tunnel, with the top of the tunnel being a minimum 30 to 70 feet below the ground. No crossings of the right-of-way would be permitted in the same plane with HRT operations. HRT stations would be accessed from street-level entrances by stairs, escalators, and elevators that would bring patrons to a mezzanine level where ticketing functions would be located. In addition to the alternative termini for the proposed extension, alignment and station location options are considered and two MOS options are evaluated in the event of a decision to build the project in phases. Estimated capital costs of the build alternatives in 2009 dollars range from $4.04 billion to $8.75 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: HRT technology would allow very high passenger-carrying capacity of up to 1,000 passengers per train and maximum speed of 70 miles per hour. Implementation would reduce traffic congestion on roads, improve transit travel time, and provide more reliable transit service to the 286,246 transit riders who travel through the corridor today. Access to major activity and employment centers and transportation equity would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction impacts would include traffic and access disruptions near station sites, temporary sidewalk and bicycle lane closures, construction noise and emissions of nitrogen oxide and particulate matter, temporary removal of parking, visual effects, and haul trucks removing material excavated from the tunnel and station boxes. Each of the five build alternatives would displace one or more properties and could result in adverse effect on historic properties at the proposed Wilshire/Rodeo Station. Some business displacement would occur. The total number of jobs displaced would depend on which portal location is selected at each station. Multiple sections of the build alternatives would traverse the Santa Monica Fault and would be susceptible to possible surface fault rupture hazard. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100353, pages Draft EIS (Volume 1)--842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 SP - ages Draft EIS (Volume 1) EP - -842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129760?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=ages+Draft+EIS+%28Volume+1%29&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 1 of 35] T2 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873129736; 14625-3_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Metro Purple Line and Metro Red Line heavy rail subway from its current westernmost termini toward west Los Angeles and Santa Monica, Los Angeles County, California is proposed. The Westside Subway Extension Transit Corridor Project results from nearly 30 years of planning and environmental review. The study area encompasses 38 square miles in western Los Angeles County and includes portions of five jurisdictions: the Cities of Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Currently, large population and employment centers are scattered throughout 15 existing major activity centers in the corridor. These activity centers are served by extremely congested road networks that will deteriorate further with the projected increase in population of 51,000 and the 58,000 additional jobs in the corridor by 2035. The current high level of transit usage is projected to increase by 29 percent between 2006 and 2035. The Westside project would extend the Metro Purple Line/Metro Red Line from its current western termini at Wilshire/Western Station and Hollywood/Highland Station to a new western terminus either in Westwood near the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), the West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital, or the City of Santa Monica. Alternatives considered in this draft EIS include a No Build Alternative, a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Alternative, five build alternatives with six options, and two minimum operable segments (MOS). The TSM Alternative would include more frequent bus service. The build alternatives would overlay heavy rail transit (HRT) on the rail and bus networks. Trains would operate in an exclusive grade-separated right-of-way, picking up electrical power from a third rail adjacent to and parallel with the running rail. The separated right-of-way would be all in a tunnel, with the top of the tunnel being a minimum 30 to 70 feet below the ground. No crossings of the right-of-way would be permitted in the same plane with HRT operations. HRT stations would be accessed from street-level entrances by stairs, escalators, and elevators that would bring patrons to a mezzanine level where ticketing functions would be located. In addition to the alternative termini for the proposed extension, alignment and station location options are considered and two MOS options are evaluated in the event of a decision to build the project in phases. Estimated capital costs of the build alternatives in 2009 dollars range from $4.04 billion to $8.75 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: HRT technology would allow very high passenger-carrying capacity of up to 1,000 passengers per train and maximum speed of 70 miles per hour. Implementation would reduce traffic congestion on roads, improve transit travel time, and provide more reliable transit service to the 286,246 transit riders who travel through the corridor today. Access to major activity and employment centers and transportation equity would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction impacts would include traffic and access disruptions near station sites, temporary sidewalk and bicycle lane closures, construction noise and emissions of nitrogen oxide and particulate matter, temporary removal of parking, visual effects, and haul trucks removing material excavated from the tunnel and station boxes. Each of the five build alternatives would displace one or more properties and could result in adverse effect on historic properties at the proposed Wilshire/Rodeo Station. Some business displacement would occur. The total number of jobs displaced would depend on which portal location is selected at each station. Multiple sections of the build alternatives would traverse the Santa Monica Fault and would be susceptible to possible surface fault rupture hazard. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100353, pages Draft EIS (Volume 1)--842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 SP - ages Draft EIS (Volume 1) EP - -842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129736?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=ages+Draft+EIS+%28Volume+1%29&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STEHEKIN RIVER CORRIDOR IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, LAKE CHELAN NATIONAL RECREATION AREA, NORTH CASCADES NATIONAL PARK SERVICE COMPLEX, WASHINGTON. [Part 1 of 3] T2 - STEHEKIN RIVER CORRIDOR IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, LAKE CHELAN NATIONAL RECREATION AREA, NORTH CASCADES NATIONAL PARK SERVICE COMPLEX, WASHINGTON. AN - 873129624; 14628-6_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of management actions to respond to the increased magnitude and frequency of flooding in the Stehekin River corridor within Lake Chelan National Recreation Area (NRA), North Cascades National Park Service Complex, Washington is proposed. The project area includes the lower Stehekin Valley, from High Bridge to the head of Lake Chelan, including Weaver Point. Land ownership includes a patchwork of public land and 460 acres of private lands. Recent major floods and resultant channel changes on the lower Stehekin River have intensified flood and erosion threats to National Park Service (NPS) facilities and are impacting natural resources within Lake Chelan NRA. The three largest recorded floods on the Stehekin River since 1911 have occurred within the past 15 years, and in response, the NPS has spent more than $3 million to protect public roads and facilities and to repair flood damage. Roads, visitor facilities, and private development once thought to be safe from the river are now threatened. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative 1), which would perpetuate current management practices, are considered in this draft EIS. Actions called for by the 1995 Lake Chelan NRA General Management Plan that would be implemented under all alternatives include replacement and relocation/construction of the NPS maintenance compound; replacement and relocation/construction of administrative housing in the same area; creation of a Lower Valley Trail that connects Stehekin Landing to High Bridge; and the ongoing use of willing seller-willing buyer land acquisition and exchange to remove development from the Stehekin River floodplain. The Company Creek Road would be maintained in its existing alignment and existing erosion protection measures along the Stehekin Valley and Company Creek roads would be maintained, including the 400-foot-long levee constructed in the 1980s. Alternative 2, which is the preferred alternative, would include more high-priority land acquisition in the channel migration zone, rerouting the Stehekin Valley Road out of the floodplain/channel migration zone around McGregor Meadows and the Lower Field, identification of new land protection priorities through the revised Land Protection Plan, designation of new campgrounds and a new raft takeout, closure of the shooting range, and implementation of erosion protection measures at three sites. Alternative 3 would include the same land acquisition as in Alternative 2 and would reroute the Stehekin Valley Road around McGregor Meadows. New campgrounds would be designated and erosion protection measures would be implemented at five erosion protection sites. Alternative 4 would maintain the alignment of the Stehekin Valley Road, including raising it through McGregor Meadows. New land protection priorities would be less than under Alternative 2. New campgrounds and a new raft takeout would be designated and erosion protection measures would be implemented at seven sites. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would help the NPS to sustainably operate and maintain administrative facilities, public access roads, trails, and campgrounds; protect water quality, scenic values, habitat, and natural processes of the Stehekin River; and continue visitor services, including those services and facilities found on private lands. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: All of the action alternatives would add to cumulative effects on the Stehekin River by installation of new erosion protection structures. Alternatives 2 and 3 would create short- and long-term disturbances to land use, vegetation and soils, water quality, and wildlife during construction of the new road around McGregor Meadows and NPS facilities. The reroute could disturb a nesting site for northern spotted owls. Management of large wood and proliferation of bank protection measures have the potential to increase the spread of nonnative plants. LEGAL MANDATES: National Park Service Organic Act of 1916 (16 U.S.C. 1 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100356, Draft EIS--628 pages, Draft Land Protection Plan--72 pages, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Parks, Refuges and Forests KW - Bank Protection KW - Dikes KW - Erosion KW - Erosion Control KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Hazards KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Land Management KW - National Parks KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources KW - Rivers KW - Roads KW - Trails KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Lake Chelan National Recreation Area KW - North Cascades National Park KW - Stehekin River KW - Washington KW - National Park Service Organic Act of 1916, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129624?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=STEHEKIN+RIVER+CORRIDOR+IMPLEMENTATION+PLAN%2C+LAKE+CHELAN+NATIONAL+RECREATION+AREA%2C+NORTH+CASCADES+NATIONAL+PARK+SERVICE+COMPLEX%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=STEHEKIN+RIVER+CORRIDOR+IMPLEMENTATION+PLAN%2C+LAKE+CHELAN+NATIONAL+RECREATION+AREA%2C+NORTH+CASCADES+NATIONAL+PARK+SERVICE+COMPLEX%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Sedro-Woolley, Washington; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STEHEKIN RIVER CORRIDOR IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, LAKE CHELAN NATIONAL RECREATION AREA, NORTH CASCADES NATIONAL PARK SERVICE COMPLEX, WASHINGTON. [Part 2 of 3] T2 - STEHEKIN RIVER CORRIDOR IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, LAKE CHELAN NATIONAL RECREATION AREA, NORTH CASCADES NATIONAL PARK SERVICE COMPLEX, WASHINGTON. AN - 873129194; 14628-6_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of management actions to respond to the increased magnitude and frequency of flooding in the Stehekin River corridor within Lake Chelan National Recreation Area (NRA), North Cascades National Park Service Complex, Washington is proposed. The project area includes the lower Stehekin Valley, from High Bridge to the head of Lake Chelan, including Weaver Point. Land ownership includes a patchwork of public land and 460 acres of private lands. Recent major floods and resultant channel changes on the lower Stehekin River have intensified flood and erosion threats to National Park Service (NPS) facilities and are impacting natural resources within Lake Chelan NRA. The three largest recorded floods on the Stehekin River since 1911 have occurred within the past 15 years, and in response, the NPS has spent more than $3 million to protect public roads and facilities and to repair flood damage. Roads, visitor facilities, and private development once thought to be safe from the river are now threatened. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative 1), which would perpetuate current management practices, are considered in this draft EIS. Actions called for by the 1995 Lake Chelan NRA General Management Plan that would be implemented under all alternatives include replacement and relocation/construction of the NPS maintenance compound; replacement and relocation/construction of administrative housing in the same area; creation of a Lower Valley Trail that connects Stehekin Landing to High Bridge; and the ongoing use of willing seller-willing buyer land acquisition and exchange to remove development from the Stehekin River floodplain. The Company Creek Road would be maintained in its existing alignment and existing erosion protection measures along the Stehekin Valley and Company Creek roads would be maintained, including the 400-foot-long levee constructed in the 1980s. Alternative 2, which is the preferred alternative, would include more high-priority land acquisition in the channel migration zone, rerouting the Stehekin Valley Road out of the floodplain/channel migration zone around McGregor Meadows and the Lower Field, identification of new land protection priorities through the revised Land Protection Plan, designation of new campgrounds and a new raft takeout, closure of the shooting range, and implementation of erosion protection measures at three sites. Alternative 3 would include the same land acquisition as in Alternative 2 and would reroute the Stehekin Valley Road around McGregor Meadows. New campgrounds would be designated and erosion protection measures would be implemented at five erosion protection sites. Alternative 4 would maintain the alignment of the Stehekin Valley Road, including raising it through McGregor Meadows. New land protection priorities would be less than under Alternative 2. New campgrounds and a new raft takeout would be designated and erosion protection measures would be implemented at seven sites. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would help the NPS to sustainably operate and maintain administrative facilities, public access roads, trails, and campgrounds; protect water quality, scenic values, habitat, and natural processes of the Stehekin River; and continue visitor services, including those services and facilities found on private lands. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: All of the action alternatives would add to cumulative effects on the Stehekin River by installation of new erosion protection structures. Alternatives 2 and 3 would create short- and long-term disturbances to land use, vegetation and soils, water quality, and wildlife during construction of the new road around McGregor Meadows and NPS facilities. The reroute could disturb a nesting site for northern spotted owls. Management of large wood and proliferation of bank protection measures have the potential to increase the spread of nonnative plants. LEGAL MANDATES: National Park Service Organic Act of 1916 (16 U.S.C. 1 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100356, Draft EIS--628 pages, Draft Land Protection Plan--72 pages, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Parks, Refuges and Forests KW - Bank Protection KW - Dikes KW - Erosion KW - Erosion Control KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Hazards KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Land Management KW - National Parks KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources KW - Rivers KW - Roads KW - Trails KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Lake Chelan National Recreation Area KW - North Cascades National Park KW - Stehekin River KW - Washington KW - National Park Service Organic Act of 1916, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129194?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=STEHEKIN+RIVER+CORRIDOR+IMPLEMENTATION+PLAN%2C+LAKE+CHELAN+NATIONAL+RECREATION+AREA%2C+NORTH+CASCADES+NATIONAL+PARK+SERVICE+COMPLEX%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=STEHEKIN+RIVER+CORRIDOR+IMPLEMENTATION+PLAN%2C+LAKE+CHELAN+NATIONAL+RECREATION+AREA%2C+NORTH+CASCADES+NATIONAL+PARK+SERVICE+COMPLEX%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Sedro-Woolley, Washington; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DESERTXPRESS HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER TRAIN: VICTORVILLE, CALIFORNIA TO LAS VEGAS, NEVADA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2009). AN - 758977846; 14627 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a privately financed, fully grade-separated, dedicated double-track passenger railroad, to be known as the DesertXpress, along a 200-mile corridor from Victorville, California to Las Vegas, Nevada are proposed. High and increasing travel demand along Interstate 15 (I-15), which parallels the proposed railroad alignment, and constraints on the expansion of air travel indicate the need for an alternative mode of passenger transportation along this route. I-15 has also been the site of frequent accidents. The draft EIS of March 2009 considered two rail alignment alternatives and a No Action Alternative. Alternative A would provide for construction of the railroad within the median of the I-15 freeway, while Alternative B would provide for a rail line that would lie within the fenced area of the I-15 rights-of-way, adjacent to automobile travel lanes. In addition to the rail line, the project would include passenger stations in Victorville and Las Vegas, operations and maintenance facilities in Victorville and Las Vegas, and a maintenance of way facility in Baker, California. Two locomotive technology options are under consideration, specifically, diesel/electric multiple unit (DEMU) and electric multiple unit (EMU) train sets. The DEMU train set would be able to reach a maximum speed of 125 miles per hour (mph), while the EMU would be able to reach a maximum speed of 150 mph. Following the publication of the draft EIS, DesertXpress Enterprises, LLC proposed several modifications and additions to address comments received during public and agency review. This supplemental draft EIS addresses the proposed modifications which include a new Victorville passenger station site option, a Barstow area rail alignment following I-15 from Lenwood through Yermo, a new rail alignment through the Clark Mountains near the Mojave National Preserve, new sites for maintenance and operation facilities in unincorporated Clark County, relocation of portions of the rail alignment in metropolitan Las Vegas from the immediate I-15 corridor to the Industrial Road/Dean Martin Drive corridor, and other minor shifts in the rail alignment. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The rail line would provide proven high-speed rail technology and a convenient alternative to the use of the congested I-15 freeway and the declining air connections between the termini. Rail operations would provide 361 to 463 permanent jobs. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would displace desert tortoise and Mojave ground squirrel habitat, present a barrier to wildlife movement, and result in mortality and disturbance amongst Mojave fringe-toed lizards, nesting raptors, migratory birds, banded gila monsters, burrowing owls, roosting bats, desert bighorn sheep, and American badgers. Two historic sites and numerous archaeological sites would be impacted. Approximately 3.37 acres of agricultural land would be directly impacted, and 6.75 acres indirectly impacted. The rights-of-way could encroach on up to 50 acres of 100-year floodplain and 10,000 linear feet of stream channel. Minority groups would experience disproportionate impacts in the vicinity of the Victorville Station and operations and maintenance facility sites. Traffic congestion would increase in the vicinity of the Victorville Station. The rail corridor would lie within an area affected by high seismic activity. From 50 to 80 sensitive receptor sites along the line would experience noise and vibration levels in excess of federal standards. Construction workers would encounter 13 to 15 hazardous materials sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0193D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100355, Volume I--463 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--1,192 pages, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Birds KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Employment KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Nevada KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Districts KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/758977846?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2009%29.&rft.title=DESERTXPRESS+HIGH-SPEED+PASSENGER+TRAIN%3A+VICTORVILLE%2C+CALIFORNIA+TO+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2009%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 758977687; 14625 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Metro Purple Line and Metro Red Line heavy rail subway from its current westernmost termini toward west Los Angeles and Santa Monica, Los Angeles County, California is proposed. The Westside Subway Extension Transit Corridor Project results from nearly 30 years of planning and environmental review. The study area encompasses 38 square miles in western Los Angeles County and includes portions of five jurisdictions: the Cities of Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, as well as portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Currently, large population and employment centers are scattered throughout 15 existing major activity centers in the corridor. These activity centers are served by extremely congested road networks that will deteriorate further with the projected increase in population of 51,000 and the 58,000 additional jobs in the corridor by 2035. The current high level of transit usage is projected to increase by 29 percent between 2006 and 2035. The Westside project would extend the Metro Purple Line/Metro Red Line from its current western termini at Wilshire/Western Station and Hollywood/Highland Station to a new western terminus either in Westwood near the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), the West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital, or the City of Santa Monica. Alternatives considered in this draft EIS include a No Build Alternative, a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Alternative, five build alternatives with six options, and two minimum operable segments (MOS). The TSM Alternative would include more frequent bus service. The build alternatives would overlay heavy rail transit (HRT) on the rail and bus networks. Trains would operate in an exclusive grade-separated right-of-way, picking up electrical power from a third rail adjacent to and parallel with the running rail. The separated right-of-way would be all in a tunnel, with the top of the tunnel being a minimum 30 to 70 feet below the ground. No crossings of the right-of-way would be permitted in the same plane with HRT operations. HRT stations would be accessed from street-level entrances by stairs, escalators, and elevators that would bring patrons to a mezzanine level where ticketing functions would be located. In addition to the alternative termini for the proposed extension, alignment and station location options are considered and two MOS options are evaluated in the event of a decision to build the project in phases. Estimated capital costs of the build alternatives in 2009 dollars range from $4.04 billion to $8.75 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: HRT technology would allow very high passenger-carrying capacity of up to 1,000 passengers per train and maximum speed of 70 miles per hour. Implementation would reduce traffic congestion on roads, improve transit travel time, and provide more reliable transit service to the 286,246 transit riders who travel through the corridor today. Access to major activity and employment centers and transportation equity would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction impacts would include traffic and access disruptions near station sites, temporary sidewalk and bicycle lane closures, construction noise and emissions of nitrogen oxide and particulate matter, temporary removal of parking, visual effects, and haul trucks removing material excavated from the tunnel and station boxes. Each of the five build alternatives would displace one or more properties and could result in adverse effect on historic properties at the proposed Wilshire/Rodeo Station. Some business displacement would occur. The total number of jobs displaced would depend on which portal location is selected at each station. Multiple sections of the build alternatives would traverse the Santa Monica Fault and would be susceptible to possible surface fault rupture hazard. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100353, pages Draft EIS (Volume 1)--842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 SP - ages Draft EIS (Volume 1) EP - -842 pages and maps, Appendices A and B (Volume 2)--CD-ROM, August 27 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Easements KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/758977687?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=ages+Draft+EIS+%28Volume+1%29&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=WESTSIDE+SUBWAY+EXTENSION+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 758977654; 14624 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/758977654?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STEHEKIN RIVER CORRIDOR IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, LAKE CHELAN NATIONAL RECREATION AREA, NORTH CASCADES NATIONAL PARK SERVICE COMPLEX, WASHINGTON. AN - 758977627; 14628 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of management actions to respond to the increased magnitude and frequency of flooding in the Stehekin River corridor within Lake Chelan National Recreation Area (NRA), North Cascades National Park Service Complex, Washington is proposed. The project area includes the lower Stehekin Valley, from High Bridge to the head of Lake Chelan, including Weaver Point. Land ownership includes a patchwork of public land and 460 acres of private lands. Recent major floods and resultant channel changes on the lower Stehekin River have intensified flood and erosion threats to National Park Service (NPS) facilities and are impacting natural resources within Lake Chelan NRA. The three largest recorded floods on the Stehekin River since 1911 have occurred within the past 15 years, and in response, the NPS has spent more than $3 million to protect public roads and facilities and to repair flood damage. Roads, visitor facilities, and private development once thought to be safe from the river are now threatened. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative 1), which would perpetuate current management practices, are considered in this draft EIS. Actions called for by the 1995 Lake Chelan NRA General Management Plan that would be implemented under all alternatives include replacement and relocation/construction of the NPS maintenance compound; replacement and relocation/construction of administrative housing in the same area; creation of a Lower Valley Trail that connects Stehekin Landing to High Bridge; and the ongoing use of willing seller-willing buyer land acquisition and exchange to remove development from the Stehekin River floodplain. The Company Creek Road would be maintained in its existing alignment and existing erosion protection measures along the Stehekin Valley and Company Creek roads would be maintained, including the 400-foot-long levee constructed in the 1980s. Alternative 2, which is the preferred alternative, would include more high-priority land acquisition in the channel migration zone, rerouting the Stehekin Valley Road out of the floodplain/channel migration zone around McGregor Meadows and the Lower Field, identification of new land protection priorities through the revised Land Protection Plan, designation of new campgrounds and a new raft takeout, closure of the shooting range, and implementation of erosion protection measures at three sites. Alternative 3 would include the same land acquisition as in Alternative 2 and would reroute the Stehekin Valley Road around McGregor Meadows. New campgrounds would be designated and erosion protection measures would be implemented at five erosion protection sites. Alternative 4 would maintain the alignment of the Stehekin Valley Road, including raising it through McGregor Meadows. New land protection priorities would be less than under Alternative 2. New campgrounds and a new raft takeout would be designated and erosion protection measures would be implemented at seven sites. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would help the NPS to sustainably operate and maintain administrative facilities, public access roads, trails, and campgrounds; protect water quality, scenic values, habitat, and natural processes of the Stehekin River; and continue visitor services, including those services and facilities found on private lands. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: All of the action alternatives would add to cumulative effects on the Stehekin River by installation of new erosion protection structures. Alternatives 2 and 3 would create short- and long-term disturbances to land use, vegetation and soils, water quality, and wildlife during construction of the new road around McGregor Meadows and NPS facilities. The reroute could disturb a nesting site for northern spotted owls. Management of large wood and proliferation of bank protection measures have the potential to increase the spread of nonnative plants. LEGAL MANDATES: National Park Service Organic Act of 1916 (16 U.S.C. 1 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100356, Draft EIS--628 pages, Draft Land Protection Plan--72 pages, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Parks, Refuges and Forests KW - Bank Protection KW - Dikes KW - Erosion KW - Erosion Control KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Hazards KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Land Management KW - National Parks KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources KW - Rivers KW - Roads KW - Trails KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Lake Chelan National Recreation Area KW - North Cascades National Park KW - Stehekin River KW - Washington KW - National Park Service Organic Act of 1916, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/758977627?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=STEHEKIN+RIVER+CORRIDOR+IMPLEMENTATION+PLAN%2C+LAKE+CHELAN+NATIONAL+RECREATION+AREA%2C+NORTH+CASCADES+NATIONAL+PARK+SERVICE+COMPLEX%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=STEHEKIN+RIVER+CORRIDOR+IMPLEMENTATION+PLAN%2C+LAKE+CHELAN+NATIONAL+RECREATION+AREA%2C+NORTH+CASCADES+NATIONAL+PARK+SERVICE+COMPLEX%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Sedro-Woolley, Washington; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER -